ReviewPostepy dermatologii i alergologii2019
An update on direct immunofluorescence for diagnosing dermatitis herpetiformis.
Review in Postepy dermatologii i alergologii, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Human Transglutaminases: Updated Insights into Activation Mechanisms, Allosteric Regulation and Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Gluten-related skin disorders: clinical presentation, diagnostic and treatments.Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG · 2025Review
- Immunopathological Assessment of the Oral Mucosa in Dermatitis Herpetiformis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Eosinophil-rich linear IgA bullous dermatosis induced by mRNA COVID-19 booster vaccine.Journal of cutaneous pathology · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a Bi-Analyte Immunoblot as a Useful Tool for Diagnosing Dermatitis Herpetiformis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Reply letter to "An update on direct immunofluorescence for diagnosing dermatitis herpetiformis". Could granular C3 deposits at the dermal epidermal junction be considered a marker of "cutaneous gluten sensitivity"?Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2021Article
- Educational Case: Bullous pemphigoid.Academic pathologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This mini-review presents an update on the direct immunofluorescence (DIF) for diagnosing dermatitis herpetiformis. The DIF of uninvolved, perilesional skin is a crucial laboratory procedure in diagnosing dermatitis herpetiformis (DH). IgA deposits at the dermal-epidermal junction (DEJ) of perilesional skin with DIF can also be found in coeliac patients with inflammatory skin diseases different from DH. In certain patients presenting with the rash resembling DH, the deposition of exclusively C3 at DEJ can be found. The term "granular C3 dermatosis" was proposed to name such a rash. Recent data on DH suggest that perhaps the very concept of DH that we are universally accepting now is misleading and should be revised.
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.