Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19578391›Full record

ReviewDeutsches Arzteblatt international2009

The serological diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis: antibodies to citrullinated antigens.

Karl Egerer, Eugen Feist, Gerd-Rüdiger Burmester

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Polymorphisms inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2018
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Karl EgererMedizinische Klinik mit Schwerpunkt Rheumatologie und Klinische Immunologie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Germany. karl.egerer@charite.de
Eugen Feist
Gerd-Rüdiger Burmester
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis article provides an overview of modern serological diagnostic testing for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) involving the detection of antibodies against citrullinated peptides/proteins (ACPA). Recommendations are also given for differential diagnosis and sequential testing in rheumatoid arthritis, with a view towards improving early diagnosis, so that irreparable joint damage can be avoided.

methodsSelective literature research, with consideration of the authors' own publications.

resultsTwo different, adequately evaluated testing systems, involving the detection of anti-CCP antibodies and of anti-MCV antibodies, are now commercially available and enable routine, relatively highly specific diagnostic testing for RA. Two point-of-care tests (POCT) for the early diagnosis of RA constitute the latest development in serologic diagnostic testing.

conclusionsThe two ACPA assays now on the market are equally useful for the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. The correlation between RA disease activity and stratification with ACPA has only been demonstrated to date through the detection of anti-MCV antibodies.

Indexed as

Arthritis, RheumatoidAutoantibodiesHumansPeptides, CyclicReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentSensitivity and SpecificityAutoantibodiescyclic citrullinated peptidePeptides, Cyclicantibody screeningautoimmune diseaseearly detection of diseaselaboratory diagnosisrheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

PMID19578391
PMCPMC2695367
OpenAlexW83273103

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.