Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31046572›Full record

ArticleLupus2019

The diagnostic accuracies of the 2012 SLICC criteria and the proposed EULAR/ACR criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus classification are comparable.

Ö Dahlström, C Sjöwall

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Lupus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Biologics : targets & therapy · 2024
    Article
  12. A Contemporary Update on the Diagnosis of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2022
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Ö Dahlström1 Swedish Institute for Disability Research, Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
C Sjöwall2 Rheumatology/Division of Neuro and Inflammation Sciences, Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0900-2048

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a joint effort, the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) recently proposed new criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) with the overarching goal to identify potential participants for clinical studies. Herein, we present the first independent evaluation of these criteria in comparison with older classification grounds using an adult Scandinavian study population of confirmed SLE cases and individuals with SLE-mimicking conditions. We included 56 confirmed SLE cases meeting the 1982 ACR criteria (ACR-82) and/or the Fries "diagnostic principle" (antinuclear antibodies on at least one occasion plus involvement of at least two defined organ systems) and 55 controls with possible systemic autoimmune disease, including the presence of any SLE-related autoantibody. The proposed EULAR/ACR criteria showed a diagnostic sensitivity of 93% (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.83-0.98) compared with 83% (95% CI, 0.72-0.91) for the updated ACR criteria from 1997. The diagnostic accuracy of all tested classification grounds was fairly similar, achieving approximately 85%. However, the disease specificity of the EULAR/ACR criteria reached only 73% (95% CI, 0.59-0.83), which was comparable with the 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) criteria, 75% (95% CI, 0.61-0.85), but clearly lower than for ACR-82, 94% (95% CI, 0.83-0.99). In this first independent evaluation of a limited number of cases, we found comparable results with respect to diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and accuracy regarding the SLICC-12 and the proposed EULAR/ACR classification criteria. However, their specificity for SLE appeared to be lower compared with ACR-82.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansLupus Erythematosus, SystemicMaleMiddle AgedRheumatologySensitivity and SpecificitySwedenYoung AdultAccuracyclassification criteriadiagnosissystemic lupus erythematosus

Identifiers

PMID31046572
PMCPMC6537028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.