Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22045310›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Rheumatology2011

Validation of new biomarkers in systemic autoimmune diseases.

Maria G Tektonidou, Michael M Ward

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Rheumatology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

Maria G TektonidouFirst Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, National University of Athens, 75 M Asias Street, 11527 Athens, Greece.
Michael M Ward

Funding

Outcomes in Rheumatic DiseasesZIAAR041153 · NIAMS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ARTHRITIS AND MUSCULOSKELETAL AND SKIN DISEASES · PI WARD, MICHAEL · 2009 to 2020
$12.6M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA AR041153
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biomarkers have an important influence on the clinical decision-making processes involved in diagnosis, assessment of disease activity, allocation of treatment, and determining prognosis. The clinical usefulness of a biomarker is dependant on demonstration of its validity. Ideally, biomarkers should provide information not available from currently available tests and should be tested as they would be used in clinical practice; however, potential biomarkers could be affected by many different clinical or patient variables-such as disease activity, therapeutic intervention, or the presence of comorbidities--and validation studies might not include all the design features that are required to ensure that the biomarker is a true measure of the clinical process it is intended to reflect. In this Review, we appraise studies that have been conducted to validate six promising new biomarkers for diagnosis, disease activity assessment, or prognosis in patients with systemic autoimmune diseases. We discuss the validity of these six biomarkers with particular reference to the features of the studies that lend weight to or distract from their findings. The intent of this discussion is to draw attention to elements of validation study design that should be considered when evaluating the robustness of a biomarker, which differ according to the marker's intended use.

Indexed as

Autoimmune DiseasesBiomarkersHumansPrognosisValidation Studies as TopicBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID22045310
PMCPMC3441180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.