Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27142378›Full record

ReviewZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2016

[Novel immunodiagnostics for inflammatory arthritis].

M Wahle, E Kling

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

M WahleSektion Rheumatologie und Klinische Immunologie, III. Medizinische Klinik, Klinikum Augsburg, Stenglinstr. 2, 86156, Augsburg, Deutschland. matthias.wahle@klinikum-augsburg.de.
E KlingInstitut für Labormedizin und Mikrobiologie, Klinikum Augsburg, Stenglinstr. 2, 86156, Augsburg, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immunodiagnostics play an important role in the differential diagnostics of arthritis but the test results must be interpreted with respect to the clinical context. The detection of antibodies against citrullinated proteins has significantly improved the immunodiagnostics of arthritis, whereas the importance of testing for rheumatoid factor has decreased due to the low specificity. Antibodies against carbamylated or oxidized proteins will expand the immunodiagnostics of arthritis (especially rheumatoid arthritis) in the future. In contrast, the determination of cytokine concentrations in plasma or synovial fluid plays a subordinate role in the differential diagnostics of arthritis. Indirect immunofluorescence continues to be the gold standard in the detection of antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and in the case of positive results further testing for antigen specificity should be carried out. The presence of ANA is not necessarily associated with autoimmune diseases. An example of a non-pathogenic ANA is anti-DFS70 antibodies.

Indexed as

Arthritis, RheumatoidAutoantibodiesBiomarkersClinical Laboratory TechniquesGermanyHumansImmunoassayImmunologic TestsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityAutoantibodiesBiomarkersAnti-CCP-antibodiesAntinuclear antibodyAutoimmune diseasesIndirect immunofluorescenceRheumatoid factor

Identifiers

PMID27142378

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.