Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39189679›Full record

ArticleMolecular genetics & genomic medicine2024

Genetic testing and new variants in diagnosis of congenital ichthyoses.

Milja Salo, Teija Kimpimäki, Heini Huhtala, Tanja Saarela

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular genetics & genomic medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Milja SaloFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Teija KimpimäkiFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1704-5785
Heini HuhtalaFaculty of Social Sciences, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.
Tanja SaarelaFaculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland.

Funding

Suomen Ihotautilääkäriyhdistys
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate how diagnostic practice in congenital ichthyoses has evolved during the years 2000-2020 and what kind of gene variants of congenital ichthyosis have been found.

methodsThe study cohort of this register-based research consisted of a total of 88 patients, whose diagnostic testing was conducted, and ichthyosis diagnoses set at the Department of Dermatology and the Department of Clinical Genetics at Tampere University Hospital during the years 2000-2020.

resultsDiagnosis of ichthyosis was confirmed with genetic testing in 33 cases, and with conventional diagnostic methods, such as clinical findings, skin biopsy and family history of ichthyoses, in 55 cases. We observed four novel variants in patients with the clinical diagnoses of congenital ichthyoses.

conclusionWhen genetic testing became available, it was offered primarily to patients with severe forms of ichthyosis. During the study period next-generation sequencing became the genetic testing method of choice providing new opportunities in diagnostics.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansIchthyosisInfantMaleMutationgeneticgenetic testinghigh‐throughput nucleotide sequencingichthyosisrare diseasessequence analysisskin diseases

Identifiers

PMID39189679
PMCPMC11348405

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.