ArticleBMJ case reports2015
Lessons from two cases: is Fabry disease the correct diagnosis?
Article in BMJ case reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fabry disease (FD) is an X linked inherited lysosomal storage disorder with complex multisystem involvement; it is caused by deficiency of the lysosomal enzyme α-galactosidase. Deficient enzyme activity leads to a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations consisting of dermatological, ophthalmological, cardiovascular, and urinary and central nervous system findings. As a result, FD should be considered in the differential diagnosis of many systemic diseases. Diagnosis of FD can arise from careful clinical and instrumental investigations, together with family history data and accurate interpretation of genetic and enzymatic analyses. Lack of knowledge on clinical findings of the disease and inept investigation methods unfortunately result in erroneous diagnosis. We present two patients who were referred to our clinic with a suspicion of ED and finally diagnosed as glycogen storage disorder type III and ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency, respectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.