ReviewZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2007
[Diagnostic strategies for autoimmune rheumatic diseases].
Review in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [New biomarkers for large vessel vasculitis and spondyloarthropathies].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2017Article
- [Laboratory diagnostics for early detection of rheumatic autoimmune diseases: a guide for the general practitioner].Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to help the clinical rheumatologist set an early and precise diagnosis and plan a rational follow-up, a close collaboration between all parties involved in the diagnostic work-up must be established. Autoimmune serology plays a key role in achieving this goal by choosing test methods that are ideal from a clinical standpoint and by presenting results obtained in such a fashion that even less experienced clinicians can correctly use the information. Simple algorithms for test ordering and for the interpretation of laboratory findings are of great benefit in daily practice, but such tools must be mutually agreed upon by the laboratory and clinical scientists. A precise diagnosis and estimation of prognosis is instrumental for optimal decision making in the clinic, but this is too complicated to be left to chance due to the inappropriate use of information. Late or wrong decisions during follow-up lead to unnecessary suffering and far higher lifetime costs for chronic diseases such as those found in rheumatology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17380342What 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.