ArticleClinical rheumatology2009
Patients' experiences of a diagnosis of Hughes' syndrome.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Misdiagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis: Past, Present, and Future.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2024Review
- A qualitative investigation of the experiences of patients living with antiphospholipid antibodies.Lupus · 2024Article
- Prevalence and adverse consequences of delayed diagnosis and misdiagnosis in thrombotic antiphospholipid syndrome. An observational cohort study and a review of the literature.Clinical rheumatology · 2023Review
- Diagnosis and treatment of patients with antiphospholipid syndrome: a mixed-method evaluation of care in The Netherlands.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2020Article
- Antiphospholipid Antibodies Overlapping in Isolated Neurological Syndrome and Multiple Sclerosis: Neurobiological Insights and Diagnostic Challenges.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objectives of the study were to describe the experience of patients immediately prior to a diagnosis of Hughes syndrome (HS) or antiphospholipid syndrome and post-diagnosis. A questionnaire survey was carried out set in the Hughes Syndrome Foundation, St. Thomas' Hospital, London, 2006. Participants were all patients who are members of the Hughes Syndrome Foundation. The main outcome measures were responses to a questionnaire relating to the experiences of people with a diagnosis of HS, such as number of hospitalisations, number of consultants seen, number of miscarriages, etc. A total of 157 patients completed the questionnaire, giving a response rate of 60.4%. Most (85%) were women and mean age was 46 years (SD 12). The median time to diagnosis was 3 years. The median number of consultants seen was 2 (max 19) with a median time in hospital pre-diagnosis of 10 days. The most common initial diagnoses were migraines, multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus erythematosus. Among women, 46% had had a miscarriage. Two thirds of respondents thought a blood test would have led to an earlier diagnosis. Comments from patients indicated a lack of awareness among specialists and general practitioners. The survey demonstrated a long time lag for diagnosis of Hughes syndrome, with increased costs to the NHS and emotional and financial cost to the patient. Greater awareness of this condition would benefit patients and the NHS.
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.