ArticleLupus science & medicine2026
Harnessing AI and social media to understand real-world patient experiences in SLE.
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo apply large language models (LLMs) to Reddit posts referencing SLE to identify patient-expressed unmet medical needs, symptom experiences and healthcare challenges, demonstrating how artificial intelligence-enabled social media listening complements traditional patient-experience research.
methodsWe extracted 4633 posts from 10 SLE-related Reddit communities using the public Reddit Application Programming Interface (October-November 2025). After removing duplicates, promotional content and posts with insufficient information, 2603 posts remained. We developed a thematic codebook through manual review of 300 posts and refined it iteratively. Two state-of-the-art LLMs (Gemini 3.0 and GPT-5.2) were evaluated for automated thematic labelling using per cent agreement, Cohen's κ and performance against a human-annotated reference set (n=100). The best-performing model was then used to quantify theme prevalence across the full dataset, followed by qualitative review of representative narratives.
resultsGPT-5.2 demonstrated higher performance (F1=0.844) than Gemini 3.0 (F1=0.811), with substantial intermodel agreement across main themes (mean κ=0.71). Posts reflected multidimensional experiences. The most frequent subtheme was
conclusionLLM-enabled social media listening offers a scalable method for synthesising large volumes of unstructured patient narratives, providing timely insights into lived experiences and unmet needs among individuals discussing lupus online. Findings align with established qualitative literature while highlighting persistent gaps in patient education, communication and care coordination. This analytical framework can be extended to other disease areas to support patient-centred care, measurement development and evidence generation relevant to therapeutic and health outcomes research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.