SynthesisRheumatology international2025
Headache as the most common manifestation of giant cell arteritis?: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Rheumatology international, 2025. 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.
- Infective Endocarditis Presenting With Scalp Allodynia and a Giant Cell Arteritis-Like Vasculitic Phenotype.The American journal of case reports · 2026Article
- Orbital MRI for diagnosing giant cell arteritis in cases of anterior ischaemic optic neuropathy.RMD open · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Challenges and Modern Therapeutic Strategies in Giant Cell Arteritis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Giant Cell Arteritis Mimicking Temporomandibular Disorder: Diagnostic Value of Temporal Artery Halo Sign.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Review
- New versus old: comparison of the 2022 ACR/EULAR versus the 1990 ACR classification criteria for giant cell arteritis in a real-world cohort.Rheumatology international · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the relative frequency of clinical features of giant cell arteritis (GCA) and to investigate the predictors of temporal artery biopsy (TAB) outcomes.
methodsA literature search of Pubmed/Medline, Embase, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), and Directory of Open Access journals (DOAJ) was conducted from January 1, 1990 to February 2025. Observational studies that reported original data on clinical features in patients diagnosed with GCA in accordance with 1990 ACR and/or 2022 ACR/EULAR classification criteria were deemed for inclusion. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to determine the pooled prevalence estimates. The study's design adhered closely to the MOOSE standards. The JBI appraisal tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias. The study's protocol was pre-registered on PROSPERO (ID: CRD42024584763).
resultsOut of initial 12,628 records, 62 articles (9971 patients) met all of the eligibility criteria. Mean patients' age upon diagnosis was 74.33 years (95%CI: 74.12-74.54 years). The most prevalent clinical feature of GCA was new-onset headache (75.7%; 95CI%: 72.2-79.0; 95%PI: 0.47-0.92). Other common symptoms of GCA were temporal artery abnormalities (51.5%; 95%CI: 45.2-57.7; 95%PI: 0.25-0.77), weakness/malaise (46.7%; 95%CI: 35.4-58.4; 95%PI: 0.09-0.88), and scalp tenderness (39.1; 95%CI: 35.3-43.1; 95%PI: 0.22-0.59). Positive TAB results were present in 73.8% of patients (95%CI: 68.1-78.8%; 95%PI: 0.35-0.94). The presence of headache (LogOR = -1.11; 95%CI: -1.92 to -0.29) or PMR (-0.71; 95%CI: -1.09 to -0.32) significantly decreases the chance of receiving positive TAB results.
conclusionsSince there is a greater likelihood of obtaining negative biopsy results, the TAB may not be required when a patient exhibits a headache along with other clinical symptoms that enable them to be diagnosed with GCA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39932568What 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.