Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37188996›Full record

ReviewZeitschrift fur Rheumatologie2023

[Assessment tools for systemic lupus erythematosus].

Martin Aringer, Nicolai Leuchten

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Martin AringerBereich Rheumatologie, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III und UniversitätsCentrum für Autoimmun- und Rheumatische Erkrankungen (UCARE), Universitätsklinikum und medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland. martin.aringer@uniklinikum-dresden.de.
Nicolai LeuchtenBereich Rheumatologie, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik III und UniversitätsCentrum für Autoimmun- und Rheumatische Erkrankungen (UCARE), Universitätsklinikum und medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A systematic assessment is critical for taking advantage of the current options for optimizing systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) management. Without regular SLE activity measurements, treat to target and remission are empty words, and the EULAR recommendations therefore insist on these assessments. They rely on activity scores, such as SLEDAI, ECLAM and BILAG or more recently, EasyBILAG and SLE-DAS. Assessment is completed by organ-specific measurement methods and the evaluation of damage. In the study setting the classification criteria and combined endpoints for clinical testing are crucial, as is measurement of the quality of life. This review article provides an overview of the current state of SLE assessments.

Indexed as

Lupus Erythematosus, SystemicQuality of LifeHumansSeverity of Illness IndexDamageDisease activityFatigueLow disease activityRemission

Identifiers

PMID37188996

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.