SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2022
Diagnostic accuracy of the European League against rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology-2019 versus the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics-2012 versus the ACR-1997 classification criteria in adult systemic lupus erythematosus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Paroxetine as an Adjuvant Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients: A Randomized Controlled Study.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Trial
- Real-world validation of the SLERPI diagnostic model with concordance and discordance analysis across established SLE classification criteria.Arthritis research & therapy · 2026Article
- Application Value of Blood Routine-Derived Indices for the Evaluation of Disease Activity in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.Clinical medicine insights. Arthritis and musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Performance of the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Risk Probability Index (SLERPI) in a cohort of Colombian population.Clinical rheumatology · 2024Article
- Impact of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus on Conception: Insights into Infertility, Fertility Preservation, Assisted Reproductive Technology, and Pregnancy Outcomes.Seminars in reproductive medicine · 2024Review
- The Multiple Faces of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Pearls and Pitfalls for Diagnosis.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2024Review
- A Clinical Picture of Unselected Patients with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus in a Tertiary Hungarian Center-A Spectrum Ranging from Pure Lupus to Overlap Syndromes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Risk Probability Index: ready for routine use? Results from a Chinese cohort.Lupus science & medicine · 2023Article
- Polyautoimmunity in systemic lupus erythematosus patients: New insights from a cross-sectional study.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2023Article
- The conundrum of neuropsychiatric systemic lupus erythematosus: Current and novel approaches to diagnosis.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)-1997, the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC)-2012, and the European League against Rheumatism (EULAR)/ACR-2019 classification criteria in adult patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched for literature comparing the three classification criteria of ACR-1997, SLICC-2012 and EULAR/ACR-2019, which took clinical diagnosis as reference. Meta-analysis was used to evaluate and compare the sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio of ACR-1997, SLICC-2012 and EULAR/ACR-2019. To assess the early diagnosis capability of the classification criteria, subgroups of patients with disease duration < 3 years and < 1 year were selected for comparison of sensitivity and specificity based on the inclusion of the original study. The sensitivity and specificity of each item in three sets of classification criteria were evaluated. In addition, the clinical and immunological characteristics of patients who did not meet the three classification criteria were compared. Results: Nine original studies were included in the analysis, including 6404 SLE patients and 3996 controls. Results showed that the diagnostic odds ratios (95% confidence interval) of the SLICC-2012 [136.35 (114.94, 161.75)] and EULAR/ACR-2019 [187.47 (158.00, 222.42)] were higher than those of the ACR-1997 [67.53 (58.75, 77.63)]. Compared with ACR-1997[(0.86 (0.82, 0.89)], SLICC-2012[(0.96 (0.93, 0.97)] and EULAR/ACR-2019[(0.95 (0.92, 0.97)] had higher sensitivity. The specificity of the three classification criteria was similar: ACR-1997, SLICC-2012, and EULAR/ACR-2019 were 0.93 (0.89, 0.95), 0.86 (0.79, 0.91), and 0.91 (0.85, 0.95), respectively. The sensitivity of SLICC-2012 and EULAR/ACR-2019 were higher than that of ACR-1997 in early-course subgroups. Patients who did not meet ACR-1997 had more hypocomplementemia, patients who did not meet SLICC-2012 had more cutaneous lupus and photosensitivity, and patients who did not meet EULAR/ACR-2019 had more cutaneous lupus and leucopenia. Conclusions: SLICC-2012 and EULAR/ACR-2019 have better diagnostic ability than the ACR-1997, and the sensitivity of the former two criteria is also higher than that of the latter; Moreover, the SLICC-2012 and EULAR/ACR-2019 for patients in the early stages of disease performed equally excellent.
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.