Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41001145›Full record

ArticlePostepy dermatologii i alergologii2025

Effectiveness of direct immunofluorescence for diagnosing autoimmune bullous diseases: data from the Central European referral department.

Magdalena Jałowska, Bogusz Falkowski, Monika Bowszyc-Dmochowska, Maria Raptis-Bolwach, Justyna Gornowicz-Porowska, Agnieszka Seraszek-Jaros, Marian Dmochowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Postepy dermatologii i alergologii, 2025. 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

7 authors.

Magdalena JałowskaAutoimmune Blistering Dermatoses Section, Department of Dermatology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Bogusz FalkowskiAutoimmune Blistering Dermatoses Section, Department of Dermatology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Monika Bowszyc-DmochowskaCutaneous Histopathology and Immunopathology Section, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Maria Raptis-BolwachAutoimmune Blistering Dermatoses Section, Department of Dermatology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Justyna Gornowicz-PorowskaDepartment and Division of Practical Cosmetology and Skin Diseases Prophylaxis, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Agnieszka Seraszek-JarosDepartment of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.
Marian DmochowskiAutoimmune Blistering Dermatoses Section, Department of Dermatology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Autoimmune bullous disorders (AIBD) are a heterogeneous group of diseases resulting from autoantibodies production. Nowadays, direct immunofluorescence (DIF) is the basic diagnostic tool for diagnosing AIBD. Aim: This study was performed to assess the percentages of positive and negative DIF tests performed in individuals clinically suspected to suffer from AIBD in a single Central European referral department laboratory and to propose ways to improve the effectiveness of DIF in AIBD imaging diagnostics. Material and methods: A total of 1985 consecutive tests were collected during 9 consecutive years (2016-2024). We analysed the total number of results, the percentages of positive and negative results year by year, and according to the unit that sent material for testing. Results: We found that almost one-third of the tests were positive (30.88% overall, over 9 years). The percentage of positive results has varied from year to year (from 26.22% in 2016 to 38.89% in 2023). The percentage of positive results was higher in outpatient clinics than in hospital wards (33.7% vs. 22.9%; Conclusions: DIF should be performed thoughtfully at both clinical and laboratory levels, and approximately 31% of positive results should be regarded as a good outcome. To increase this percentage, specialised units should be maintained to keep up with the constant development of knowledge and experience in AIBD. Negative DIF results could also be useful in differential diagnostics of AIBD, but their percentage should be minimized.

Indexed as

blistercost-benefit analysisdirect immunofluorescencepemphigoidpemphigus

Identifiers

PMID41001145
PMCPMC12458065

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.