Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27498835›Full record

ReviewClinical reviews in allergy & immunology2017

Challenges in the Standardization of Autoantibody Testing: a Comprehensive Review.

Renato Tozzoli, Danilo Villalta, Nicola Bizzaro

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 64 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Autoantibodies in the follow-up of autoimmune hepatitis.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Standardization of Autoantibody Testing in Autoimmune Hepatitis.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2020
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Autoantibody Profiles in Autoimmune Rheumatic Diseases.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2019
    Article
  16. Autoimmunity in 2017.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2018
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Bench to bedside review of myositis autoantibodies.Clinical and molecular allergy : CMA · 2018
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Renato TozzoliLaboratory of Clinical Pathology, S. Maria degli Angeli Hospital, Pordenone, Italy.
Danilo VillaltaClinical Allergology and Immunology, S. Maria degli Angeli Hospital, Pordenone, Italy.
Nicola BizzaroLaboratory of Clinical Pathology, San Antonio Hospital, via Morgagni 18, 33028, Tolmezzo, UD, Italy. nicola.bizzaro@aas3.sanita.fvg.it.
Azienda Ospedaliera Santa Maria Degli Angeli · ITOspedale Sant Antonio · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Standardization and harmonization are complementary tools to achieve higher testing quality in laboratory medicine. Both are of great relevance and are strongly needed in autoimmune diagnostics, due to the impressive advance in basic research and technological development observed in this diagnostic field in recent years that has led to the introduction of many new tests and new analytical methods. It is, therefore, essential that this strong innovative thrust is translated into clinical practice in a coordinated way to avoid confusion and the risk of potentially harmful errors for the patient. However, while standardization of antibody assays is a very complex task, harmonization of procedures and behaviors is a more feasible target and should necessarily include all the phases of the total testing process-in the pre-analytical phase, appropriateness of test requests, harmonization of autoantibody terminology, and adoption of uniform nomenclature for laboratory tests; in the analytical phase, harmonization of measurements, and sharing of test profiles and diagnostic algorithms; and in the post-analytical phase, harmonization of data reporting, and criteria for interpreting immunoserological results, especially harmonization of units, reference intervals, decision limits, and definition and notification of critical values. We here provide and discuss some examples of harmonization initiatives related to anti-nuclear antibodies, TSH receptor, and anti-thyroid peroxidase antibodies and to antibodies associated with autoimmune hepatitis and with celiac disease. These initiatives could be the starting steps to achieve a wider consensus and a closer interaction among stakeholders in the path of autoimmune diagnostics harmonization to enhance clinical effectiveness and provide greater patient safety.

Indexed as

AutoimmunityAntibodies, AntinuclearAutoantibodiesAutoimmune DiseasesCeliac DiseaseHepatitis, AutoimmuneHumansImmunoassayReceptors, ThyrotropinReference StandardsAntibodies, AntinuclearAutoantibodiesReceptors, Thyrotropinthyroid microsomal antibodiesANAAutoimmune diagnosticsAutoimmune hepatitisCeliac diseaseGluten sensitivityHarmonizationReflex testThyroid antibodiesTSH receptor antibodies

Identifiers

PMID27498835
OpenAlexW2491165534

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.