Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29942364›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease2018

Ankylosing spondylitis and axial spondyloarthritis: recent insights and impact of new classification criteria.

Fabian Proft, Denis Poddubnyy

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.3field-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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 148 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Low Frequency of HLA-B27 in Ankylosing Spondylitis Patients from Turkey: Insights from the Thrace Region.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

9 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.

Fabian ProftDepartment of Gastroenterology, Infectiology and Rheumatology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Denis PoddubnyyDepartment of Gastroenterology, Infectiology and Rheumatology, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4537-6015
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Development of the Assessment in Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS) classification criteria for axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) was one of the major breakthroughs in the field over the past decade. Despite some concerns related to the specificity of the criteria, they stimulated research into the early stage of the disease. This resulted in major advances in the understanding of the course of the disease, revealing predictors of progression, improvement in early diagnosis and treatment in axial SpA. In this review, we summarize the recent developments resulting from the introduction of the ASAS classification criteria for axial SpA and the implications for research and clinical practice.

Indexed as

ankylosing spondylitisASASAxial spondyloarthritisclassification criteriadiagnosis

Identifiers

PMID29942364
PMCPMC6009093
OpenAlexW2803439162

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.