Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38702511›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Rheumatology2024

Rethinking antiphospholipid syndrome to guide future management and research.

Jason S Knight, Doruk Erkan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Rheumatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Animal models of antiphospholipid syndrome.Frontiers in immunology · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. New definitions for antiphospholipid syndrome: ready for clinical use?Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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.

Jason S KnightDivision of Rheumatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0995-9771
Doruk ErkanBarbara Volcker Center for Women and Rheumatic Diseases, Hospital for Special Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA. erkand@hss.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7216-677X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) consists of thrombotic, non-thrombotic and obstetric clinical manifestations developing in individuals with persistent antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). Although researchers have made progress in characterizing different clinical phenotypes of aPL-positive people, the current approach to clinical management is still mostly based on a 'one size fits all' strategy, which is derived from the results of a limited number of prospective, controlled studies. With the 2023 publication of the ACR-EULAR APS classification criteria, it is now possible to rethink APS, to lay the groundwork for subphenotyping through novel pathophysiology-informed approaches, and to set a future APS research agenda guided by unmet needs in clinical management.

Indexed as

Antiphospholipid SyndromeAntibodies, AntiphospholipidBiomedical ResearchHumansAntibodies, Antiphospholipid

Identifiers

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.