In Latin a relative clause can be causal and the causal nature can be emphasized with quippe, ut, utpote or praesertim. A causal relative clause can always be replaced with a causal clause, but not vice versa. Is there a preference to use a causal relative clause rather than a causal clause in classical Latin?
For example, would classical Roman authors rather write
Caesar domi manebat, quippe/ut/utpote qui aegrotaret.
Caesar domi manebat, cum aegrotaret. or
Caesar domi manebat, quia aegrotabat.
or are both choices equally common when both are possible? Both are grammatically valid, so it is a question of style.
If there is no clear preference for one or the other in general, what is the difference in tone between a causal relative clause and a causal clause? When might one prefer one and when the other?