ArticleRheumatology international2025
Factors associated with diagnostic delay and specialty consultation patterns in systemic sclerosis: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Rheumatology international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Early diagnosis of Systemic Sclerosis (SSc) is challenging due to nonspecific symptoms and clinical overlap with other autoimmune diseases. To investigate factors associated with diagnostic delays in SSc, focusing on the number and specialties of physicians consulted before diagnosis. This cross-sectional study included SSc patients registered at a university rheumatology clinic. Demographics, clinical features, and physical examination findings were recorded. The number and specialties of physicians consulted before diagnosis were obtained through structured face-to-face interviews. Of 240 screened patients, 135 were included (120 female, 88.8%; 55 with diffuse SSc, 40.7%; mean age 52.1 ± 11.5 years). The median time to diagnosis was 36 months (IQR 12-96) from Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) onset and 11(IQR 0-35) months from the first non-RP symptom. Patients with limited SSc had a significantly longer RP-to-diagnosis interval than those with diffuse SSc (44 vs. 20 months, p = 0.024). The median number of physicians consulted before diagnosis was 3 (range 1-9). Higher educational level (IRR = 0.97, p = 0.036) and referral by a familiar healthcare professional (IRR = 0.78, p = 0.035) were independently associated with fewer pre-diagnostic consultations. Among 119 patients who recalled their first physician, 42 (35.3%) initially consulted an internist, 28 (23.5%) a family physician, 11 (9.2%) a dermatologist, and 10 (8.4%) a cardiovascular surgeon; the remainder visited other specialists. Only 8 patients (6.7%) received an SSc diagnosis at their first consultation. SSc diagnosis is often delayed, requiring multiple consultations. Greater physician awareness and timely rheumatology referrals are essential.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41283914What 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.