Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20125179›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Rheumatology2010

Autoantibodies as predictive tools in systemic sclerosis.

Svetlana I Nihtyanova, Christopher P Denton

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Rheumatology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 90 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
90citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

90 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 200 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

30 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Svetlana I NihtyanovaRoyal Free and University College Medical School, London, UK.
Christopher P Denton
University College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The pathogenetic role of autoantibodies in systemic sclerosis (SSc) remains unclear, but these autoantibodies have been established as strong predictors of disease outcome and the pattern of organ complications in patients with this condition. The three most frequently observed types of SSc-specific autoantibody-anti-centromere antibodies, anti-topoisomerase antibodies and anti-RNA polymerase III antibodies-are found in over 50% of patients; the presence of each is generally exclusive of the others. Although a lot less frequently observed, antibodies directed against U3RNP and Th/To are also specific for scleroderma, whereas anti-Pm/Scl, anti-Ku and anti-U1RNP antibodies are seen mainly in patients with overlap syndromes. Up to 11% of patients with SSc can test negative for antinuclear antibodies. Strong links exist between autoantibody specificities and disease presentation and outcome, which make autoantibodies essential assessment tools in patients with SSc.

Indexed as

AutoantibodiesBiomarkersHumansScleroderma, SystemicAutoantibodiesBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID20125179
OpenAlexW1988241269

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.