↓ Skip to main content

A Review of Serological Tests to Assist Diagnosis of Reactive Arthritis: Critical Appraisal on Methodologies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Review of Serological Tests to Assist Diagnosis of Reactive Arthritis: Critical Appraisal on Methodologies
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2013.00418
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tamara Tuuminen, Kari Lounamo, Marjatta Leirisalo-Repo

Abstract

On a population-based level, the incidence of reactive arthritis (ReA) is 0.6-27/100,000. The definition of ReA varies and its pathogenesis is not yet clear. Attempts in basic immunology to suggest hypotheses for proliferation of forbidden B cell clones, molecular mimicry, and involvement of cross-reactive antibodies are helpful but not sufficient. Importantly, for the clinical diagnosis of the preceding infection, serology is widely used. Unfortunately, the accuracy of associations between serologic findings and clinical conclusions is plagued by poor standardization of methods. So far, few attempts have been done to examine the pitfalls of different approaches. Here, we review several serologic techniques, their performance and limitations. We will focus on serology for Yersinia, Campylobacter, Salmonella, Shigella, and Chlamydia trachomatis because these bacteria have a longer history of being associated with ReA. We also address controversies regarding the role of serology for some other bacteria linked to autoimmune disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Finland 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 35 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 16%
Other 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 9 24%
Unknown 6 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Social Sciences 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 December 2013.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#27,414
of 31,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,406
of 288,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#335
of 503 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 288,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 503 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.