Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37404716›Full record

ReviewJournal of inflammation research2023

Future Biomarkers for Infection and Inflammation in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Shuang Cui, Jie Qian

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of inflammation research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Review of the Current Status of Anesthetic Management of Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
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.

Shuang CuiDepartment of Rheumatology, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, 226001, People's Republic of China.
Jie QianDepartment of Rheumatology, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, 226001, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0001-6461-3082

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) increases the susceptibility to a variety of infections that are often difficult to diagnose and can be asymptomatic or symptoms are atypical. Usually, this is a great challenge for rheumatologists, because it is difficult to distinguish infection and aseptic inflammation at an early stage. Prompt diagnosis and treatment of bacterial infections in immunosuppressed individuals is critical for clinicians, and early exclusion of infection allows for specific treatment of inflammatory diseases and avoids the unnecessary use of antibiotics. However, for patients with clinically suspected infection, traditional laboratory markers are not specific for bacterial infection and cannot be used to distinguish outbreaks from infections. Therefore, new infection markers that can distinguish infection from underlying disease are urgently needed for clinical practice. Here, we review the novel biomarkers in RA patients with infection. These biomarkers include presepsin, serology and haematology, as well as neutrophils, T cells, and natural killer cells. Meanwhile, we discuss meaningful biomarkers that distinguish infection from inflammation and develop novel biomarkers for clinical applications, allowing clinicians to make better decisions when diagnosing and treating RA.

Indexed as

biomarkerinfectioninflammationrheumatoid arthritisT cell

Identifiers

PMID37404716
PMCPMC10317533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.