Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24705829›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Clinical and serological features of patients referred through a rheumatology triage system because of positive antinuclear antibodies.

Christie Fitch-Rogalsky, Whitney Steber, Michael Mahler, Terri Lupton, Liam Martin, Susan G Barr, Dianne P Mosher, James Wick, Marvin J Fritzler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Challenges in the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. The Clinical Relevance of Anti-DFS70 Autoantibodies.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2017
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

9 authors.

Christie Fitch-RogalskyFaculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Whitney SteberFaculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Michael MahlerINOVA Diagnostics Inc., San Diego, California, United States of America.
Terri LuptonFaculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Liam MartinFaculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Susan G BarrFaculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Dianne P MosherFaculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
James WickFaculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Marvin J FritzlerFaculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe referral of patients with positive anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) tests has been criticized as an inappropriate use of medical resources. The utility of a positive ANA test in a central triage (CT) system was studied by determining the autoantibody profiles and clinical diagnoses of patients referred to rheumatologists through a CT system because of a positive ANA test.

methodsPatients that met three criteria were included: (1) referred to Rheumatology CT over a three year interval; (2) reason for referral was a "positive ANA"; (3) were evaluated by a certified rheumatologist. The CT clinical database was used to obtain demographic and clinical information and a serological database was used to retrieve specific ANA and/or extractable nuclear antigen (ENA) test results. Clinical information was extracted from the consulting rheumatologist's report.

results15,357 patients were referred through the CT system; 643 (4.1%) of these because of a positive ANA and of these 263 (40.9%) were evaluated by a certified rheumatologist. In 63/263 (24%) of ANA positive patients, the specialist provided a diagnosis of an ANA associated rheumatic disease (AARD) while 69 (26.2%) had no evidence of any disease; 102 (38.8%) had other rheumatologic diagnoses and 29 (11%) had conditions that did not meet AARD classification criteria. Of ANA positive archived sera, 15.1% were anti-DFS70 positive and 91.2% of these did not have an AARD.

conclusionsThis is the first study to evaluate the serological and clinical features of patients referred through a CT system because of a positive ANA. The spectrum of autoantibody specificities was wide with anti-Ro52/TRIM21 being the most common autoantibody detected. Approximately 15% of referrals had only antibodies to DFS70, the vast majority of which did not have clinical evidence for an AARD. These findings provide insight into the utility of autoantibody testing in a CT system.

Indexed as

Antibodies, AntinuclearFluorescent Antibody Technique, IndirectHumansImmunoassayRheumatic DiseasesRheumatologyRibonucleoproteinsSS-A AntigenTriageAntibodies, AntinuclearRibonucleoproteinsSS-A Antigen

Identifiers

PMID24705829
PMCPMC3976309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.