Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24819586›Full record

ReviewClinical reviews in allergy & immunology2014

Autoimmunity in 2013.

Carlo Selmi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Autoimmunity in 2016.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2017
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Autoimmunity in 2014.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2015
    Review
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.

Carlo SelmiDivision of Rheumatology, Allergy, and Clinical Immunology, University of California, Davis, CA, USA, carlo.selmi@unimi.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The peer-reviewed publications in the field of autoimmunity published in 2013 represented a significant proportion of immunology articles and grew since the previous year to indicate that more immune-mediated phenomena may recognize an autoimmune mechanism and illustrated by osteoarthritis and atherosclerosis. As a result, our understanding of the mechanisms of autoimmunity is becoming the paradigm for translational research in which the progress in disease pathogenesis for both tolerance breakdown and inflammation perpetuation is rapidly followed by new treatment approaches and clinical management changes. The similarities across the autoimmune disease spectrum outnumber differences, particularly when treatments are compared. Indeed, the therapeutics of autoimmune diseases are based on a growing armamentarium that currently includes monoclonal antibodies and small molecules which act by targeting molecular markers or intracellular mediators with high specificity. Among the over 100 conditions considered as autoimmune, the common grounds are well illustrated by the data reported for systemic lupus erythematosus and rheumatoid arthritis or by the plethora of studies on Th17 cells and biomarkers, particularly serum autoantibodies. Further, we are particularly intrigued by studies on the genomics, epigenetics, and microRNA at different stages of disease development or on the safe and effective use of abatacept acting on the costimulation of T and B cells in rheumatoid arthritis. We are convinced that the data published in 2013 represent a promising background for future developments that will exponentially impact the work of laboratory and clinical scientists over the next years.

Indexed as

AutoimmunityPublishingAnimalsAutoimmune DiseasesClinical Trials as TopicHumansPubMed

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.