ArticleCureus2024
Frequency of Repeating Antinuclear Antibody Testing: When Less Is More.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Natural Autoantibodies Negatively Correlate with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Incidence in Cirrhosis.Cancer research communications · 2026Article
- Autoantibody Ordering Patterns Across a Tertiary Hospital: A Retrospective Audit.Open access rheumatology : research and reviews · 2026Article
- An international multicenter retrospective analysis of repeated anti-ENA testing in ANA-associated rheumatic diseases, a data-driven proposal to increase testing efficacy.Journal of translational autoimmunity · 2025Article
- Optimizing antiphospholipid antibody testing: a real-world analysis of appropriateness and resource utilization.Immunologic research · 2025Article
- Correlation of Anti-Nuclear Antibody Productions With Activity and Chronicity Indexes in Lupus Nephritis: Experience at Urban-Based Tertiary Medical Center.Sage open pathologyArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives Antinuclear antibodies (ANA) are autoantibodies that are associated with and ordered to diagnose autoimmune connective tissue disease. ANA have high sensitivity (~98%) but low specificity (~75%), and because they can be found in healthy individuals and non-rheumatologic conditions leading to their elevation, ANA tests are often requested and interpreted inappropriately by clinicians. The aim of this study was to retrospectively assess how frequently ANA testing is repeated in the adult population of Saudi Arabia (SA) and which factors are associated with and lead to inappropriate testing. Methodology We investigated a study group of 40,634 adult patients who underwent 229,825 ANA tests from 2018 to 2022 in an academic hospital in Jeddah, SA. We took a random sample of 500 patients from the study group, along with their 998 ANA tests, to look in depth into our research questions. Variables related to patients, ANA tests, and ordering physicians were collected. Descriptive and analytical statistics were employed to address the research questions, and a p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results We found 57% of the ordered ANA tests to have positive results, with the most common titers of mild positivity being 1:80 and 1:160. Most repeated ANA tests were ordered with an interval of more than one year, and when repeated, 67% of test results remained unchanged. The majority of seroconversions resulted from negative ANA tests or those with weak (titer 1:40) or mild positivity (titer 1:80-1:160). The results of the moderate (titer 1:320-1:640) and strong (titer ≥1280) positivity ANA tests did not change. Only 11% of repeated ANA tests were found to be appropriate for repetition. The most common specialties associated with ordering ANA tests in general were internal medicine, followed by rheumatology, and finally family medicine. Our correlation analysis revealed that being female, having systemic connective tissue disease, and having a rheumatologist as a specialist were all associated with ordering more than 10 ANA tests (p < 0.05). Conclusion Because the results of repeated ANA tests did not change much, our study suggests that the cost of repeating ANA tests and the subsequent potentially unnecessary interventions should all be carefully examined before scheduling a repeated ANA test. Further studies involving patients from SA and across wider healthcare settings (academic, community, and private hospitals and healthcare centers) are warranted.
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.