ArticleClinical rheumatology2017
Comparison of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients managed early after diagnosis in specialty versus community care clinics.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Saudi National Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Adult Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Current rheumatology reviews · 2025Guideline
- Impact of glucocorticoids on the incidence of lupus-related major organ damage: a systematic literature review and meta-regression analysis of longitudinal observational studies.Lupus science & medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Fever of unknown origin in pregnancy: A case report.Case reports in women's health · 2024Article
- Article
- From Symptoms to Diagnosis: An Observational Study of the Journey of SLE Patients in Saudi Arabia.Open access rheumatology : research and reviews · 2022Article
- New therapeutic strategies in systemic lupus erythematosus management.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2019Review
- Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in Primary Care: An Update and Practical Messages for the General Practitioner.Frontiers in medicine · 2018Review
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To compare management and outcomes of SLE patients treated in community clinics (Cc) with those treated in specialty clinic (Sc) within 10 years after SLE diagnosis. A single-center, matched cohort study design was used. We identified 54 SLE patients who were referred to a Sc from Cc within 5 years of SLE diagnosis, and 101 inception SLE patients who followed in a Sc. Patients in Cc were matched 1:2 based on gender, decade of SLE diagnosis, and age at diagnosis within 3 years with Sc patients. Disease characteristics, damage accumulation, death, cardiovascular (CVS) risk factors, and events were compared at 5 and 10 years of disease. Regression analyses taking into account the paired data were conducted. At 5 years of disease, patients referred from Cc had less cumulative ACR criteria, but more active disease. They were on higher doses of glucocorticoids (GCS) but less antimalarial treatment. At 10 years of disease and follow-up entirely in Sc, Sc patients had less disease activity. They had lower cumulative GCS doses. They had less hypertension and osteoporosis but more hypercholesterolemia than Cc patients. No statistically significant difference in damage accrual, CVS events, and death were detected. Regression analysis confirmed an association between being inception Sc patients and less active disease at 10 years. Lupus patients should be under the care of a lupus specialist early in their disease course for better control of their disease activity and to minimize use of GCS.
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.