ArticleHeadache2026
Utility of ANA in hospitalized patients with headache and suspected systemic autoimmune disease.
Article in Headache, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study evaluates antinuclear antibody (ANA) test performance in identifying rheumatologic conditions as the source of the headache.
backgroundANA testing is widely used to screen for autoimmune diseases in patients with headaches, but its diagnostic utility remains unclear.
methodsIn this retrospective analytic, cross-sectional study, 539 patients hospitalized with headache at Sheba Medical Center (2007-2022) underwent ANA testing. Data included demographics, ANA titers and patterns, C-reactive protein levels, and rheumatologic diagnoses confirmed at discharge or follow-up. Statistical analyses compared clinical features between groups with and without rheumatologic diagnoses.
resultsRheumatologic diagnoses were confirmed in 9.6% (n = 52). Affected patients were older (median 54.7 vs. 41.9 years, p < 0.001), had higher ANA positivity (76.9% vs. 41.9%, p < 0.001), and had elevated titers (p = 0.003). Homogeneous (17.5% vs. 5.4%) and mixed (25.0% vs. 14.2%) staining patterns were more frequent in rheumatologic cases (p = 0.02). C-reactive protein levels lacked diagnostic utility except in vasculitis and giant cell arteritis. Notably, 83.6% of ANA-positive patients had no rheumatologic diagnosis.
conclusionsWhereas ANA positivity correlates with rheumatologic disease in patients with headache, its low positive predictive value limits utility as a standalone screening tool. Though age was a differentiator in ANA positivity, our findings support that ANA testing should be performed only when there is clinical suspicion for systemic autoimmune disease, regardless of patient age. Overuse may lead to false positives, unnecessary investigations, and resource strain. Clinical context rather than serology should guide autoimmune evaluation in headache management.
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.