ArticleData in brief2021
Data on the utilization of paraneoplastic syndrome autoantibody testing at an academic medical center.
Article in Data in brief, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning-assisted cancer diagnosis in patients with paraneoplastic autoantibodies.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Long term survival and outcomes in patients with paraneoplastic neurologic syndromes.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Paraneoplastic syndrome in neuroophthalmology.Journal of neurology · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Paraneoplastic syndromes are rare conditions associated with characteristic autoantibodies produced by malignancy, although similar autoantibodies and clinical presentations may occur in the absence of any neoplasm. Testing for paraneoplastic syndromes often involves panels of autoantibody assays. While autoantibody testing may reveal or confirm actionable clinical diagnoses, inappropriate utilization of testing may be low yield and further lead to false positives that may confuse the clinical picture. There is thus opportunity to improve patient care by analyzing patterns of paraneoplastic autoantibody test utilization. The data in this article provides results from detailed retrospective review of patients tested by 7 autoantibody tests or test panels offered by two large reference laboratories in the United States. The data include 1,446 tests performed on 1,338 unique patients at an academic medical center. For all results, detailed chart review revealed main category of presenting symptoms, patient location at time of testing (either inpatient or outpatient), sex, age, whether cancer was present at the time of testing or later detected, and the specific results of the testing. The data are summarized by category of testing and specific autoantibodies.
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.