SynthesisLupus2026
Psychosis in patients with systematic lupus erythematosus: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Lupus, 2026. 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.
- Article
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
ObjectivesPsychosis is a rare but severe neuropsychiatric manifestation of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Its prevalence, clinical predictors, and immunopathogenesis remain incompletely understood. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of psychosis in adult SLE patients and identify associated clinical and immunological risk factors.MethodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify all relevant studies with ≥10 adults through November 2024. Case-series, case reports, narrative reviews and conference abstracts were excluded. Quality assessment employed the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Statistical analysis was performed using the random-effects model, with heterogeneity assessed via I
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.