Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19922728›Full record

ReviewCurrent rheumatology reports2009

Laboratory investigation in the diagnosis of vasculitis.

Luis Felipe Flores-Suárez

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current rheumatology reports, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Luis Felipe Flores-SuárezPrimary Systemic Vasculitides Clinic, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Calzada de Tlalpan 4502, Colonia Sección XVI, CP 14080, Mexico City, Mexico. felipe98@prodigy.net.mx

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Few tests have been firmly established to diagnose primary systemic vasculitides. Although antineutrophil cytoplasmic autoantibodies (ANCA) are an exception, no consensus exists on the best method to detect them and they have proved of limited aid in relapse prediction. This article discusses common methods and techniques used to detect ANCA, their clinical usefulness, and recent biomarkers that may replace ANCA in established disease.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Antineutrophil CytoplasmicBiomarkersEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFluorescent Antibody Technique, IndirectHumansSystemic VasculitisAntibodies, Antineutrophil CytoplasmicBiomarkers

Identifiers

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.