ReviewCurrent rheumatology reports2019
Issues in CPPD Nomenclature and Classification.
Review in Current rheumatology reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- The Triglyceride-Glucose Index is associated with hospital and Intensive Care Unit Mortality in critically ill patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2026Article
- Ultrasonography in the assessment of calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease.Skeletal radiology · 2025Review
- Large language models for accurate disease detection in electronic health records: the examples of crystal arthropathies.RMD open · 2024Article
- An Update on the Diagnosis and Management of Calcium Crystal Disease.Current rheumatology reports · 2023Review
- Diagnosis and Treatment of Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition (CPPD) Disease: A Review.Open access rheumatology : research and reviews · 2023Review
- Article
- Review: Outcome measures in calcium pyrophosphate deposition.Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology · 2021Review
- A critical review of the available evidence on the diagnosis and clinical features of CPPD: do we really need imaging?Clinical rheumatology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis paper covers confusion and challenges in the nomenclature of calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease. Clinicians, investigators, and patients are faced with a variety of terms that are used to describe CPPD and its phenotypes, and clarity is greatly needed to help advance research and patient care. Motivation for the upcoming development of CPPD classification criteria is reviewed. RECENT
findingsEULAR proposed recommended terminology for CPPD in 2011. International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9 and ICD-10) billing codes identify definite or probable CPPD with variable accuracy depending on the clinical setting and comparator group. READ diagnostic codes have been employed to identify pseudogout in UK datasets but their accuracy has not been evaluated. CPPD classification criteria will provide a system for identifying a relatively homogenous group of patients to be included in clinical studies, enabling comparison of outcomes across studies. CPPD nomenclature remains challenging for clinicians, investigators, and patients. A lay-friendly definition of CPPD, using easily accessible terminology, would be welcome. CPPD classification criteria are a necessary step in moving forward CPPD clinical research and may involve a range of clinical, laboratory, and imaging modalities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31346795What 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.