ReviewJournal of translational autoimmunity2022
Rational development and application of biomarkers in the field of autoimmunity: A conceptual framework guiding clinicians and researchers.
Review in Journal of translational autoimmunity, 2022. 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.
- Intra-Individual Variability of Urinary EGF and Clusterin, and Effect of Frozen Storage on Stability: Results from UVALID.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Review
- Patterns of Glomerular Injury: Histopathological Classification and Clinical Correlation.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clear guidance is needed in the development and implementation of laboratory biomarkers in medicine. So far, no standardized phased approach is established that would pilot researchers and clinicians in this process. This leads to often incompletely validated biomarkers, which can bear the consequence of wrong applications, misinterpretation and inadequate management in the clinical context. In this conceptual article, we describe a stepwise approach to develop and comprehensively validate laboratory biomarkers. We will delineate basic steps including technical performance, pre-analytical issues, and biological variation, as well as advanced aspects of biomarker utility comprising interpretability, diagnostic and prognostic accuracy, and health-care outcomes. These aspects will be illustrated by using well-known examples from the field of immunology. The application of this conceptual framework will guide researchers in conducting meaningful projects to develop and evaluate biomarkers for the use in clinical practice. Furthermore, clinicians will be able to adequately interpret pre-clinical and clinical diagnostic literature and rationally apply biomarkers in clinical practice. Improvement in the implementation and application of biomarkers might relevantly change the management and outcomes of our patients for the better.
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.