Home|Journals|Articles by Year|Audio Abstracts

Original Article

Performance evaluation of the ACR 1997, SLICC 2012, and EULAR / ACR 2019 criteria of pediatric systemic lupus erythematosus

Esra Bağlan,Semanur Özdel,Tülin Güngör,Evra Çelikkaya,Deniz Karakaya,Fatma Yazılıtaş,Evrim Kargın Çakıcı,Mehmet Bülbül.

Cited by 0 Articles

Objective: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is the prototype of chronic autoimmune diseases. One-fifth of all SLE disease occurs in childhood. In this study, it was aimed to compare the SLE classifying criteria that have been used so far. These are the ACR (American College of Rheumatology) 1997, SLICC (Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics) 2012, and EULAR (European League Against Rheumatism) / ACR 2019 criteria.

Methods: Patients with 34 pediatric SLE and 32 antinuclear antibodies (ANA) (+) control groups who were followed up in Ankara Dr. Sami Ulus Obstetrics and Children's Hospital Pediatric Rheumatology Clinic were recruited to study. All of these patients were diagnosed by three pediatric rheumatologists. The control group consisted of ANA (+) patients with other rheumatologic diseases.

Results: The sensitivities of the ACR 1997, SLICC 2012, and EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria were 76.5%, 94.1%, and 88.2%, respectively. The specificities of the criteria for ACR 1997, SLICC2012, and EULAR/ACR 2019 were 93.8%.

Conclusion: Although SLICC 2012 showed the best sensitivity, all three classification criteria had the same specificity.

Key words: Keywords: classification criteria; differences; pediatric; Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Full-text options

Share this Article

Online Article Submission
• ejmanager.com

ejPort - eJManager.com
Refer & Earn
About BiblioMed
License Information
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Contact Us

The articles in Bibliomed are open access articles licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.