ReviewACR open rheumatology2025
Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Vasculitides: A Systematic Review.
Review in ACR open rheumatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Rheumatology and Systemic Inflammatory Diseases: From Pattern Recognition to Signal Analysis and Clinical Decision Support.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Advances in the Diagnosis, Treatment and Prognosis of ANCA-Associated Glomerulonephritis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-enabled precision medicine for inflammatory skin diseases.The Journal of investigative dermatology · 2026Review
- Beyond clinical criteria: emerging biomarkers and advanced imaging in the diagnosis, monitoring and treatment of vasculitides.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveVasculitides are rare inflammatory disorders that sometimes can be difficult to diagnose due to their diverse presentations. This review examines the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to improve diagnosis and outcome prediction in vasculitis.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore, and Scopus identified relevant studies from 2000 to 2024. AI applications were categorized by data type (clinical, imaging, textual) and by task (diagnosis or prediction). Studies were assessed for risk of bias using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.
resultsA total of 46 studies were included. AI models achieved high diagnostic performance in Kawasaki disease, with sensitivities up to 92.5% and specificities up to 97.3%. Predictive models for complications, such as intravenous Ig resistance in Kawasaki disease, showed areas under the curves between 0.716 and 0.834. Other vasculitis types, especially those using imaging data, were less studied and often limited by small datasets.
conclusionThe current literature shows that AI algorithms can enhance vasculitis diagnosis and prediction, with deep- and machine-learning models showing promise in Kawasaki disease. However, broader datasets, more external validation, and the integration of newer models like large language models are needed to advance their clinical applicability across different vasculitis types.
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.