ArticleLupus science & medicine2024
Multidisciplinary re-evaluation of neuropsychiatric events to confirm the neuropsychiatric lupus diagnosis at an Indonesian tertiary hospital.
Article in Lupus science & medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveNeuropsychiatric SLE (NPSLE) has a broad spectrum and to date, there is no gold-standard biomarker. The diagnosis relies on clinical assessment, supporting examinations and exclusion of other possible aetiologies. One method that can be used to establish NPSLE is to conduct a re-evaluation by involving several fields of medical science. This study aims to reassess SLE cases with neuropsychiatric (NP) manifestations through multidisciplinary re-evaluation and determine the final diagnosis of NPSLE or non-NPSLE.
methodsThis retrospective cross-sectional study used medical record data from patients with SLE with NP manifestations. Inclusion criteria included patients diagnosed with SLE, who had clinical manifestations of NP and were >18 years old. Multidisciplinary re-evaluation was conducted and agreed upon the diagnosis of NPSLE or non-NPSLE.
resultsWe included 94 subjects with a total of 132 NP events consisting of 69 NPSLE and 63 non-NPSLE. After re-evaluating NPSLE events, 33.3% were still concluded to be NPSLE. Meanwhile, from the non-NPSLE group, 22.2% were then declared as NPSLE. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the NPSLE and non-NPSLE groups. The proportion of NP events in both groups was almost the same except for cerebrovascular disease manifestations which were more common in the NPSLE group. Higher Mexican SLE Disease Activity Index scores with (p<0.001) or without NP (p=0.02) were observed in the NPSLE group compared with the non-NPSLE group, as well as higher proportion of active disease (p=0.03), higher anti-double-stranded DNA titres (p<0.001) and lower values of C3 (p=0.018) and C4 (p=0.001).
conclusionsMultidisciplinary re-evaluation can be used as a method to confirm the diagnosis of NPSLE. There is a tendency for overdiagnosis of NPSLE when clinicians are faced with NP events in patients with SLE. Complete clinical and supporting data are needed to determine the final diagnosis of NPSLE.
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.