ReviewMedical journal, Armed Forces India2016
Antiphospholipid syndrome: A diagnostic challenge.
Review in Medical journal, Armed Forces India, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping Thrombosis Serum Markers byMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Portal vein thrombosis as extraintestinal complications of Crohn's disease: a case report and review of literature.Journal of medical case reports · 2024Review
- Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is an acquired autoimmune thrombophilic disorder that is characterized by thrombosis (venous, arterial and microvascular) and obstetric morbidity due to a diverse family of antibodies against phospholipid-binding proteins present in plasma. The term antiphospholipid antibody is actually a misnomer as the antibodies are not against the phospholipid per se, but target the plasma protein co-factors, which bind to anionic PLs. The exact etiology has not been elucidated and is multifactorial. The initial guidelines for the diagnosis of APS were laid down in Sapporo, 1999, which were subsequently revised as the Sydney Consensus Conference criteria in 2006. Major changes were the inclusion of β2GPI as independent laboratory criteria, addition of ischemic stroke and transient cerebral ischemia as established clinical criteria and the requirement of repeating the test after 12 weeks. The laboratory tests recommended are coagulation assays, which study the effect of lupus anticoagulant on the clotting time and immunological assays, mostly ELISAs to detect IgG and IgM antibodies against cardiolipin and/or β2 glycoprotein I. For the diagnosis of APS, at least one clinical criterion and one laboratory criterion should be present. Limitations pertaining to the standardization, reproducibility and robustness of the currently recommended diagnostic tests still remain. Despite elaborate guidelines and syndrome defining criteria, the diagnosis of APS still remains a challenge. A greater interaction between the clinicians and the laboratory professionals is necessary for arriving at the correct diagnosis as a misdiagnosis of APS can have grave consequences.
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.