Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39936150›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in immunology2024

Why is it so difficult to understand why we don't understand human systemic lupus erythematosus? Contemplating facts, conflicts, and impact of "the causality cascade paradigm".

Ole Petter Rekvig

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in immunology, 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. Review
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

1 author.

Ole Petter RekvigFürst Medical Laboratory, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In attempts to understand systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), we find ourselves in the intellectual cross-point between nosology, pathogenicity-oriented science, philosophy, empiricism, and qualified conjectures. A vital consequence in science theory is that scientific hypotheses that are not critically investigated are in danger of being transformed into scientific dogmas. This statement has consequences for this study. Two central problematic aspects are discussed. For the first, we have to consider new selection principles for classification criteria-implying integration of the causality principle. Second, central historical data must be implemented if we aim to understand SLE. These data comprise famous descriptions of distinct, dynamically changing DNA structures linked to the genetic machinery. These unique structures have since their discoveries decades ago mostly been ignored in SLE research. Likewise, inconclusive dogmatic data indicate that different glomerular ligands are recognized by nephritogenic anti-dsDNA antibodies-exposed chromatin fragments or inherent membrane ligands. These incongruent models have not been comparatively and systematically investigated. Three research areas will be critically discussed: (

Indexed as

Lupus Erythematosus, SystemicAnimalsAntibodies, AntinuclearCausalityHumansAntibodies, Antinucleardynamically changing DNA structureslupus nephritis pathogenesisSLE classification criteriasystemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)the causality cascade paradigmthe causality principle

Identifiers

PMID39936150
PMCPMC11811100

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.