ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Perspectives on chronic granulomatous disease: results of a clinician survey.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic granulomatous disease (CGD) is a primary immune deficiency characterized by neutrophils with an insufficient oxidative burst. Symptoms include infections and inflammatory manifestations affecting the lungs, lymph nodes, liver, bone, soft tissue, and other organs. Diagnostic and treatment approaches may vary between patients with X-linked CGD and patients with autosomal recessive CGD, depending on their age at diagnosis and the type and severity of their symptoms. Female carriers of X-linked CGD may also manifest symptoms of CGD that require tailored treatment and monitoring over time, though there is little consensus on management strategies for this population. The aim of this study was to measure perceptions among US-based clinicians on current diagnostic, treatment, and monitoring practices for patients with CGD, including variance in approaches across CGD subtypes. Methods: A 25-item survey was distributed to clinicians in various disciplines with experience in CGD care. Questions probed clinicians' overall approaches to CGD diagnosis, barriers to CGD care, preferred treatments, and factors influencing treatment decisions. When relevant, results were stratified to show differences in clinical approaches for male patients with X-linked CGD, patients with autosomal recessive CGD, and symptomatic female carriers of X-linked CGD. Result: Clinicians ranked the presence of CGD-associated pathogens as the factor most frequently leading to CGD identification, over the presence of minor or major infections, occurrence of noninfectious manifestations, and family history. Specialty referrals were likely to lead to a CGD diagnosis only sometimes or seldom. Infection severity was ranked as the top factor influencing CGD treatment recommendations across all CGD subtypes, although actual reported treatment decisions varied substantially for male patients with X-linked CGD and patients with autosomal recessive CGD vs. symptomatic female carriers of X-linked CGD. Conclusion: This survey is the first multidisciplinary US survey focused on clinician perceptions of current CGD care practices, including management of symptomatic female carriers of X-linked CGD. The results highlight the need for greater evidence-based clinical consensus in CGD diagnostic and treatment practices, particularly for symptomatic female carriers of X-linked CGD, and the importance of amplifying clinical suspicion for CGD among specialty clinicians to increase timely CGD diagnosis.
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.