Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29251660›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in rheumatology2018

Epidemiology of systemic lupus erythematosus: an update.

George Stojan, Michelle Petri

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in rheumatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 169 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
169citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
15.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

169 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 385 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

109 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

George StojanDivision of Rheumatology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Michelle Petri
Johns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Lupus CohortR01AR043727 · NIAMS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI PETRI, MICHELLE A · 1997 to 2015
$8.2M
Hopkins Lupus CohortR01AR069572 · NIAMS · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI PETRI, MICHELLE A · 2016 to 2020
$3.4M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR043727NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR069572
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewSystemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is the prototypical systemic autoimmune disease with a significant disease burden across the world among different ethnic, racial, and age groups. The pathophysiological understanding of SLE is constantly evolving and with it, the need for a better definition of the disease itself, for understanding the risk among the different affected populations, and for identifying the factors responsible for the damage accrual through the years. RECENT

findingsMore accurate estimates of incidence and prevalence of SLE among different ethnicities and minority groups not only in the USA, but also in Europe, Middle East, and Asia have provided new insights into the disease burden around the world. Despite advances in treatment, mortality among SLE patients remains high with significant ethnic and geographic variations. SUMMARY: Sex, race, and ethnicity significantly affect SLE incidence, prevalence, and mortality.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesComorbidityEuropeGlobal HealthHumansIncidenceLupus Erythematosus, SystemicMiddle EastNeoplasmsPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID29251660
PMCPMC6026543
OpenAlexW2773800864

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.