ArticleArthritis care & research2026
Assessment of Skin in Patients With Systemic Sclerosis Using High-Frequency Ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography: A Comparative Study With Histology, Molecular, and Clinical Parameters.
Article in Arthritis care & research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shear Wave Elastography for Non-Invasive Assessment of Skin Involvement in Systemic Sclerosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Transabdominal shear-wave elastography for the assessment of esophageal stiffness in systemic sclerosis: a retrospective case-control study.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Article
- Increased thyroid stiffness without volume change in systemic sclerosis: a case-control study using two-dimensional shear wave elastography.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveUltrasound (US) has been proposed as a potential tool for assessing skin fibrosis in systemic sclerosis (SSc). However, a large-scale comparison of US-based assessment with histologic markers of skin fibrosis has not been reported. We evaluated US-based skin assessments for their face validity (differentiation between involved SSc and healthy control [HC] skin), construct validity (comparison to modified Rodnan skin score [mRSS]), and criterion validity (comparison to histologic and gene expression fibrosis markers).
methodsTwenty HCs and 52 patients with SSc underwent clinical and US assessment followed by a forearm skin biopsy. Predefined areas were assessed on the finger, hand, and forearm bilaterally. mRSS, US, histologic and molecular (reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction) evaluations were performed by blinded, independent assessors. Dermal thickness, echogenicity, and elastography were assessed using a high-frequency GE LOGIQ P9 US machine.
resultsExcept in the hand area, the US variables could not differentiate between HC and clinically affected SSc skin (face validity). There was only a weak to moderate correlation between US-based measurements and mRSS in the hand and finger areas (construct validity). US-based thickness showed moderate correlation with histologic thickness (ρ = 0.43; P = 0.002) but no statistically significant correlations with other histologic or gene expression markers of fibrosis in patients with SSc (criterion validity).
conclusionHigh-frequency US assessment of SSc skin does not show consistent and strong face, construct, or criterion validity. The role of this assessment tool remains limited, underscoring the need for further development of a quantitative and accurate tool for assessing SSc skin fibrosis.
Indexed as
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.