ArticleInternational journal of hepatology2025
Minimal Criteria to Screen for Wilson Disease: A Delphi Consensus in the United States.
Article in International journal of hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The objective was to develop consensus on minimal screening criteria for Wilson disease (WD) diagnosis in US gastroenterology and neurology settings for implementation in clinical practice to support the timely diagnosis of WD. Methods: A modified Delphi panel with three rounds was conducted. The first round survey was developed with input from a steering committee of four clinical experts in WD who set the analysis rules (consensus: ≥ 80%). Other US gastroenterologists/hepatologists or neurologists with experience treating WD were recruited using purposive sampling, and 32 were invited to participate. Results: Eleven panelists completed the three rounds. Consensus was reached for 94/126 (74.6%) statements. All panelists agreed that hepatomegaly, splenomegaly, or stigmata of liver disease are suggestive of WD in patients with a neuropsychiatric manifestation; a neurologic exam, 24-h urine copper, ceruloplasmin, and Kayser-Fleischer (KF) ring examination should be performed; and liver biopsy and liver copper determination can be a useful final stage to confirm WD diagnosis. Panelists agreed that noninvasive testing should be performed prior to invasive testing and that the absence of KF rings does not exclude a diagnosis of WD. Panelists agreed that it is important to collaborate in a multidisciplinary team. Conclusions: This study identified minimal criteria to raise suspicion of WD, minimal tests to confirm or rule out a WD diagnosis, and areas with poor consensus to be explored in future research. These results can complement clinical practice guidance and support cross-specialty collaboration.
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.