ArticleClinical rheumatology2018
Impact of follow-up visits on disease outcome in Chinese systemic lupus erythematosus.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The objective of this study is to determine whether the frequency of visits would affect disease activity and disease damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). We recruited 147 patients who met the 1997 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for SLE. Patients were divided into three groups based on follow-up frequency: ≤ 6 visits/year (group 1), 6-12 visits/year (group 2), and > 12 visits/year (group 3). Disease activity and organ damage were evaluated using the SLE disease activity index (SLEDAI) and Systemic Lupus International Collaborative Clinics (SLICC)/ACR criteria, respectively. Data on disease features, patient characteristics, and treatment were retrospectively reviewed. We found that the SLICC score was significantly lower in patients with > 12 visits/year (P = 0.008), while the SLEDAI score showed no significant difference. The age at symptom onset (32.68 ± 13.53) and the age at SLE diagnosis (33.32 ± 13.81) in group 3 were significantly older than those in the other two groups. In univariate regression analysis, the frequency of visits, the age at symptom onset, and the age at SLE diagnosis were found to be associated with the SLICC scores. Visit frequency has no impact on SLE disease activity, but may be associated with less disease damage, an important outcome.
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.