ACR Meeting Abstracts

ACR Meeting Abstracts

  • Meetings
    • ACR Convergence 2024
    • ACR Convergence 2023
    • 2023 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • ACR Convergence 2022
    • ACR Convergence 2021
    • ACR Convergence 2020
    • 2020 ACR/ARP PRSYM
    • 2019 ACR/ARP Annual Meeting
    • 2018-2009 Meetings
    • Download Abstracts
  • Keyword Index
  • Advanced Search
  • Your Favorites
    • Favorites
    • Login
    • View and print all favorites
    • Clear all your favorites
  • ACR Meetings

Abstract Number: 0191

Beyond the Symptoms: Exploring Cognitive Bias in Lupus Diagnosis Within Primary Care

Alyssa Howren1, Quan Le Tran1, Sadaf Sediqi1, Saadiya Hawa2, Eleni Linos1, Titilola Falasinnu3, Yashaar Chaichian1 and Julia Simard1, 1Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, 2Weiss Memorial Hospital, Chicago, IL, 3Stanford School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA

Meeting: ACR Convergence 2024

Keywords: Diagnostic criteria, gender, primary care, race/ethnicity, Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
Session Information

Date: Saturday, November 16, 2024

Title: Healthcare Disparities in Rheumatology Poster I

Session Type: Poster Session A

Session Time: 10:30AM-12:30PM

Background/Purpose: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a heterogeneous autoimmune rheumatic disease whose prognosis varies by race and sex. To understand whether the cognitive processes of clinical decision-making influence the diagnosis of SLE, we conducted a factorial survey experiment to evaluate variation in primary care providers’ (PCP) diagnosis of SLE when all aspects of a clinical case are held constant, with the exception of race and sex.

Methods: An online survey was distributed via email from 04/11/2024 to 06/10/2024 to PCPs across the US. Participants were presented with five clinical vignettes, one of which was SLE, where we randomly modified the race (Black/White) and sex (female/male) of the “case” (Fig 1). Primary outcomes were correct text-based responses for SLE diagnosis after initial case presentation (top three initial diagnoses) and after reviewing additional lab results (final diagnosis). We secondarily measured participants’ review time and planned next steps (treatment, referral, tests) as a proxy for certainty. We calculated descriptive statistics for all outcomes (mean, median, proportion) stratified by assigned randomized factor and used chi-square tests to evaluate between group differences with respect to correct diagnoses.

Results: A total of 1036 PCPs (42.6% women, mean age 52.1±12.0 years) completed the survey. Most completed residency ≥11 years ago (76.4%) and indicated their practice focused on patient care (85.6%). At initial case presentation, 63.7% (660/1036) of participants correctly identified SLE within their top three differential diagnoses. These correct initial diagnoses significantly differed according to race and sex, with the highest proportion of correct SLE diagnoses occurring for Black females (Table 1). Overall, most participants elected to order tests (91.8%, 951/1036) and only 7.9% (82/1036) elected to send a referral, of which 95.1% were to rheumatology. Median review time among participants with correct initial diagnoses was longer for White male vignettes (178 s), followed by Black female (154 s), Black male (139 s), and White female (133 s) vignettes. After participants reviewed lab results, the proportion assigning a final diagnosis of SLE (64.0%, 663/1036) remained unchanged from the initial diagnosis. A final diagnosis of SLE occurred more often among female versus male vignettes (Table 1). Infectious arthritis and viral illness were common incorrect diagnoses for Black and White male cases, respectively (Fig 2).

Conclusion: We found that despite identical clinical information, a PCP’s diagnosis of SLE was significantly influenced by the race and sex of the patient. Indeed, the highest accuracy at initial diagnosis occurred for Black females, suggesting cognitive biases in clinical decision-making. These results persisted at the final diagnosis after reviewing additional lab results. Review times also varied by race and sex, with longer times for White males, hinting at varying degrees of diagnostic certainty. Altogether, findings underscore the importance of addressing implicit biases in medical training and practice to ensure equitable diagnostic processes for all patients.

Supporting image 1

Figure 1 Overview of factorial survey experiment.
Abbreviations: ANA – antinuclear antibody; CRP – C-reactive protein; ESR – erythrocyte sedimentation rate; PCP – primary care provider; SLE – systemic lupus erythematosus.

Supporting image 2

Figure 2 Participants’ final diagnosis for SLE clinical vignettes with race and sex jointly randomized.
Presented diagnoses are for categories that were recorded by ≥5% of participants. Responses for ‘other rheumatic disease’ included rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, inflammatory arthritis, Bechet’s, and connective tissue diseases. All diagnostic categories aside from SLE (only) are not mutually exclusive.
SLE (+/- differential) refers to participant responses that included SLE and may have also included an additional differential diagnosis (e.g., viral illness).
SLE (only) refers to participant responses that definitively stated SLE.
Abbreviations: BF – Black Female; BM – Black Male; SLE – systemic lupus erythematosus; WF – White Female; WM – White Male

Supporting image 3


Disclosures: A. Howren: None; Q. Tran: None; S. Sediqi: None; S. Hawa: None; E. Linos: None; T. Falasinnu: None; Y. Chaichian: Amgen, 5, Eli Lilly, 5; J. Simard: None.

To cite this abstract in AMA style:

Howren A, Tran Q, Sediqi S, Hawa S, Linos E, Falasinnu T, Chaichian Y, Simard J. Beyond the Symptoms: Exploring Cognitive Bias in Lupus Diagnosis Within Primary Care [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2024; 76 (suppl 9). https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/beyond-the-symptoms-exploring-cognitive-bias-in-lupus-diagnosis-within-primary-care/. Accessed .
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

« Back to ACR Convergence 2024

ACR Meeting Abstracts - https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/beyond-the-symptoms-exploring-cognitive-bias-in-lupus-diagnosis-within-primary-care/

Advanced Search

Your Favorites

You can save and print a list of your favorite abstracts during your browser session by clicking the “Favorite” button at the bottom of any abstract. View your favorites »

All abstracts accepted to ACR Convergence are under media embargo once the ACR has notified presenters of their abstract’s acceptance. They may be presented at other meetings or published as manuscripts after this time but should not be discussed in non-scholarly venues or outlets. The following embargo policies are strictly enforced by the ACR.

Accepted abstracts are made available to the public online in advance of the meeting and are published in a special online supplement of our scientific journal, Arthritis & Rheumatology. Information contained in those abstracts may not be released until the abstracts appear online. In an exception to the media embargo, academic institutions, private organizations, and companies with products whose value may be influenced by information contained in an abstract may issue a press release to coincide with the availability of an ACR abstract on the ACR website. However, the ACR continues to require that information that goes beyond that contained in the abstract (e.g., discussion of the abstract done as part of editorial news coverage) is under media embargo until 10:00 AM ET on November 14, 2024. Journalists with access to embargoed information cannot release articles or editorial news coverage before this time. Editorial news coverage is considered original articles/videos developed by employed journalists to report facts, commentary, and subject matter expert quotes in a narrative form using a variety of sources (e.g., research, announcements, press releases, events, etc.).

Violation of this policy may result in the abstract being withdrawn from the meeting and other measures deemed appropriate. Authors are responsible for notifying colleagues, institutions, communications firms, and all other stakeholders related to the development or promotion of the abstract about this policy. If you have questions about the ACR abstract embargo policy, please contact ACR abstracts staff at [email protected].

Wiley

  • Online Journal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Permissions Policies
  • Cookie Preferences

© Copyright 2025 American College of Rheumatology