Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26122247›Full record

ReviewCurrent gastroenterology reports2015

Clinical Utility of Biomarkers in IBD.

Gerhard Rogler, Luc Biedermann

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current gastroenterology reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Epithelial Barrier Function in Gut-Bone Signaling.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2017
    Review
  16. Observational
  17. 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

2 authors.

Gerhard RoglerDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Zurich, Raemistrasse 100, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland, gerhard.rogler@usz.ch.
Luc Biedermann

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is no gold standard for the diagnosis and monitoring of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). Biomarkers are useful tools for the management of patients suffering from IBD. However, they should be used only when their additional information is useful for clinical decision-making. In principal, four situations during the management of an individual IBD patient can be discriminated from a clinical standpoint in which biomarkers provide useful information. First, biomarkers may be helpful when the diagnosis of IBD is established and aid in the discrimination between ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD) is necessary. Second, biomarkers may be helpful in the prognostic evaluation of IBD severity or disease behavior and for early decisions on the best treatment. The third situation in which biomarkers are useful is the evaluation of disease activity during the disease course, for monitoring and for guidance of ongoing treatment. Finally, the fourth typical situation when biomarkers are of value is after surgery to predict or diagnose a relapse of the disease. From a clinical point of view, it may be more useful to discuss specific biomarkers and their individual value and impact in these four prototypic situations than to sum up advantages and disadvantages for each biomarker isolated from the clinical situation. Therefore, this overview is structured in chapters reflecting those four typical situations during the disease course of IBD patents to critically evaluate the potential and value of each of the biomarkers in the specific situation.

Indexed as

BiomarkersHumansInflammatory Bowel DiseasesPrognosisBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID26122247

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.