Cited by 112Systemic Lupus Erythematosus ResearchSystemic Sclerosis and Related DiseasesDelphi Technique in Research

Developing and refining new candidate criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus classification: an international collaboration

Open access
Tedeschi, Sara K., Johnson, Sindhu R., Boumpas, Dimitrios, Daikh, David, Dörner, Thomas, Jayne, David, Kamen, Diane, Lerstrøm, Kirsten +8 more·2018·Arthritis Care & Research

Abstract

Objective: To define candidate criteria within multiphase development of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria, jointly supported by the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism. Prior steps included item generation and reduction by Delphi exercise, further narrowed to 21 items in a nominal group technique exercise. Our objectives were to apply an evidence‐based approach to the 21 candidate criteria, and to develop hierarchical organization of criteria within domains. Methods: A literature review identified the sensitivity and specificity of the 21 candidate criteria. Data on the performance of antinuclear antibody (ANA) as an entry criterion and operating characteristics of the candidate criteria in early SLE patients were evaluated. Candidate criteria were hierarchically organized into clinical and immunologic domains, and definitions were refined in an iterative process. Results: Based on the data, consensus was reached to use a positive ANA of ≥1:80 titer (HE p‐2 cells immunofluorescence) as an entry criterion and to have 7 clinical and 3 immunologic domains, with hierarchical organization of criteria within domains. Definitions of the candidate criteria were specified. Conclusion: Using a data‐driven process, consensus was reached on new, refined criteria definitions and organization based on operating characteristics. This work will be followed by a multicriteria decision analysis exercise to weight criteria and to identify a threshold score for classification on a continuous probability scale.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/acr.23317

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [7]Hoyer BF Schmajuk G Aringer M Johnson SR Daikh DI Dorner T Multi-center Delphi exercise reveals important key items in classifying SLE [abstract] Arthritis Rheum 2015 67 Suppl 10 PMC6026087 29287313
  2. [15]Cohen AS Reynolds WE Franklin EC Kulka JP Ropes MW Shulman LE Preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus Bulletin Rheum Dis 1971 21 643 48

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tedeschi, S. K., Johnson, S. R., Boumpas, D., Daikh, D., Dörner, T., Jayne, D., Kamen, D., Lerstrøm, K., Mosca, M., Ramsey‐Goldman, R., Sinnette, C., Wofsy, D., Smolen, J. S., Naden, R. P., Aringer, M., & Costenbader, K. H.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of Crete (GR)
  • San Francisco VA Medical Center (US)
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Medical University of South Carolina (US)
  • LUPUS EUROPE, Farum Denmark
  • University of Pisa (IT)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Medical University of Vienna (AT)
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus (DE)
Venue
Arthritis Care & Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-02-22
Volume
70
Issue
4
Pages
571-581
ISSN
  • 0893-7524 (ISSN-L)
  • 2151-464X
  • 2151-4658
OpenAlex
W2735806626
Cited by
112
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 2
FWCI
3.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Arthritis Care & Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutial research information system (University of Pisa) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo
Funders
  • European League Against Rheumatism
  • Lupus Foundation of America
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (L30‐AR‐070514, K24‐AR‐066109)
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Systemic Sclerosis and Related Diseases
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
Keywords
systemic lupus erythematosus, classification criteria, antinuclear antibodies, sensitivity and specificity, clinical domains, multi-criteria decision making, American College of Rheumatology, European League Against Rheumatism
MeSH terms
Antibodies, Antinuclear, Complement System Proteins, Delphi Technique, Europe, Humans, International Cooperation, Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic, Terminology as Topic, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, Severity of Illness Index, United States, Reproducibility of Results, Biomarkers, Consensus

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review