ArticleReumatologia2015
Comparison of clinical and serological parameters in female and male patients with systemic sclerosis.
Article in Reumatologia, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Standardized mortality ratios in systemic sclerosis: a meta-analysis assessing overall and sex- and disease subtype-specific differences.Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2024Pooled it
- Overall and sex- and disease subtype-specific mortality in patients with systemic sclerosis : An updated meta-analysis.Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2019Pooled it
- Whole-Body Distribution and Clinical Association of Telangiectases in Systemic Sclerosis.JAMA dermatology · 2018Article
- Malnutrition is an independent risk factor for mortality in Mexican patients with systemic sclerosis: a cohort study.Rheumatology international · 2017Article
- Assessment of hospitalization and mortality of scleroderma in-patients: a thirteen-year study.ReumatologiaArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe course of systemic sclerosis (SSc) can differ in female and male patients. According to the literature the incidence rates of diffuse cutaneous SSc, scleroderma renal crisis and digital ulceration are higher in male patients. The aim of the study was to compare selected clinical and serological parameters in male and female patients with SSc. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe study encompassed 101 European Caucasian patients with SSc, including 23 men, hospitalized in the Department of Rheumatology. Patients fulfilled the American Rheumatism Association (ARA) classification criteria for SSc. The study groups of men and women were assessed according to the SSc subtype, incidence of internal organ involvement and presence of antinuclear antibodies considered SSc markers.
resultsDiffuse cutaneous (dc) SSc was observed more commonly in men than in women (13/23 vs. 25/78; p = 0.03). The time from the development of Raynaud's phenomenon to the diagnosis was significantly shorter in male compared to female patients (3.2 ±4.7 vs. 7.5 ±7.1; p = 0.01). The incidence of scleroderma renal crisis (SRC) was significantly higher (3/23 vs. 2/78; p = 0.04) and of other calcifications significantly lower in the male group compared to the female group (1/23 vs. 20/78; p = 0.02).
conclusionsWe concluded that the incidence of dcSSc is higher in men compared to women. The time from the development of Raynaud's phenomenon to the diagnosis is shorter in the male compare to female group. The incidence of SRC is higher, whereas that of calcifications is lower in SSc men. The serological profiles of female and male patients with SSc are comparable.
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.