Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPetri, Michelle
dc.contributor.authorGoldman, Daniel W
dc.contributor.authorAlarcón, Graciela S
dc.contributor.authorGordon, Caroline
dc.contributor.authorMerrill, Joan T
dc.contributor.authorFortin, Paul R
dc.contributor.authorBruce, Ian N
dc.contributor.authorIsenberg, David
dc.contributor.authorWallace, Daniel
dc.contributor.authorNived, Ola
dc.contributor.authorRamsey-Goldman, Rosalind
dc.contributor.authorBae, Sang-Cheol
dc.contributor.authorHanly, John G
dc.contributor.authorSanchez-Guerrero, Jorge
dc.contributor.authorClarke, Ann E
dc.contributor.authorAranow, Cynthia
dc.contributor.authorManzi, Susan
dc.contributor.authorUrowitz, Murray
dc.contributor.authorGladman, Dafna D
dc.contributor.authorKalunian, Ken
dc.contributor.authorWerth, Victoria P
dc.contributor.authorZoma, Asad
dc.contributor.authorBernatsky, Sasha
dc.contributor.authorKhamashta, Munther
dc.contributor.authorJacobsen, Søren
dc.contributor.authorBuyon, Jill P
dc.contributor.authorDooley, Mary Anne
dc.contributor.authorvan Vollenhoven, Ronald
dc.contributor.authorGinzler, Ellen
dc.contributor.authorStoll, Thomas
dc.contributor.authorPeschken, Christine
dc.contributor.authorJorizzo, Joseph L
dc.contributor.authorCallen, Jeffery P
dc.contributor.authorLim, Sam
dc.contributor.authorİnanç, Murat
dc.contributor.authorKamen, Diane L
dc.contributor.authorRahman, Anisur
dc.contributor.authorSteinsson, Kristjan
dc.contributor.authorFranks, Andrew G
dc.contributor.authorMagder, Laurence S
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-08T20:39:46Z
dc.date.available2023-02-08T20:39:46Z
dc.date.issued2021-07-14
dc.identifier.citationPetri M, Goldman DW, Alarcón GS, Gordon C, Merrill JT, Fortin PR, Bruce IN, Isenberg D, Wallace D, Nived O, Ramsey-Goldman R, Bae SC, Hanly JG, Sanchez-Guerrero J, Clarke AE, Aranow C, Manzi S, Urowitz M, Gladman DD, Kalunian K, Werth VP, Zoma A, Bernatsky S, Khamashta M, Jacobsen S, Buyon JP, Dooley MA, van Vollenhoven R, Ginzler E, Stoll T, Peschken C, Jorizzo JL, Callen JP, Lim S, Inanç M, Kamen DL, Rahman A, Steinsson K, Franks AG Jr, Magder LS. Comparison of the 2019 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology/American College of Rheumatology Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification Criteria With Two Sets of Earlier Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification Criteria. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2021 Sep;73(9):1231-1235. doi: 10.1002/acr.24263. Epub 2021 Jul 14. PMID: 32433832.en_US
dc.identifier.eissn2151-4658
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/acr.24263
dc.identifier.pmid32433832
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12648/8312
dc.description.abstractThe Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria and the revised American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997 criteria are list based, counting each SLE manifestation equally. We derived a classification rule based on giving variable weights to the SLICC criteria and compared its performance to the revised ACR 1997, the unweighted SLICC 2012, and the newly reported European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR)/ACR 2019 criteria sets.
dc.description.abstractThe physician-rated patient scenarios used to develop the SLICC 2012 classification criteria were reemployed to devise a new weighted classification rule using multiple linear regression. The performance of the rule was evaluated on an independent set of expert-diagnosed patient scenarios and compared to the performance of the previously reported classification rules.
dc.description.abstractThe weighted SLICC criteria and the EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria had less sensitivity but better specificity compared to the list-based revised ACR 1997 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria. There were no statistically significant differences between any pair of rules with respect to overall agreement with the physician diagnosis.
dc.description.abstractThe 2 new weighted classification rules did not perform better than the existing list-based rules in terms of overall agreement on a data set originally generated to assess the SLICC criteria. Given the added complexity of summing weights, researchers may prefer the unweighted SLICC criteria. However, the performance of a classification rule will always depend on the populations from which the cases and non-cases are derived and whether the goal is to prioritize sensitivity or specificity.
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.urlhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acr.24263en_US
dc.rights© 2020, American College of Rheumatology.
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.titleComparison of the 2019 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology/American College of Rheumatology Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification Criteria With Two Sets of Earlier Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Classification Criteria.en_US
dc.typeArticle/Reviewen_US
dc.source.journaltitleArthritis care & researchen_US
dc.source.volume73
dc.source.issue9
dc.source.beginpage1231
dc.source.endpage1235
dc.source.countryUnited States
dc.source.countryUnited States
dc.description.versionAMen_US
refterms.dateFOA2023-02-08T20:39:46Z
html.description.abstractThe Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria and the revised American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1997 criteria are list based, counting each SLE manifestation equally. We derived a classification rule based on giving variable weights to the SLICC criteria and compared its performance to the revised ACR 1997, the unweighted SLICC 2012, and the newly reported European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR)/ACR 2019 criteria sets.
html.description.abstractThe physician-rated patient scenarios used to develop the SLICC 2012 classification criteria were reemployed to devise a new weighted classification rule using multiple linear regression. The performance of the rule was evaluated on an independent set of expert-diagnosed patient scenarios and compared to the performance of the previously reported classification rules.
html.description.abstractThe weighted SLICC criteria and the EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria had less sensitivity but better specificity compared to the list-based revised ACR 1997 and SLICC 2012 classification criteria. There were no statistically significant differences between any pair of rules with respect to overall agreement with the physician diagnosis.
html.description.abstractThe 2 new weighted classification rules did not perform better than the existing list-based rules in terms of overall agreement on a data set originally generated to assess the SLICC criteria. Given the added complexity of summing weights, researchers may prefer the unweighted SLICC criteria. However, the performance of a classification rule will always depend on the populations from which the cases and non-cases are derived and whether the goal is to prioritize sensitivity or specificity.
dc.description.institutionSUNY Downstateen_US
dc.description.departmentRheumatologyen_US
dc.description.degreelevelN/Aen_US
dc.identifier.journalArthritis care & research


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Isenberg_ComparisonClassificat ...
Size:
150.9Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2020, American College of Rheumatology.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2020, American College of Rheumatology.