ReviewHematology reports2026
Pernicious Anemia: Basic Pathophysiology and Diagnostic Challenges in Neuropsychiatric Patients.
Review in Hematology reports, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pernicious anemia (PA) represents a significant diagnostic challenge in neuropsychiatric patients due to its subtle and variable presentation. While PA is traditionally associated with clinical and biochemical manifestations of anemia, many patients, particularly those with neuropsychiatric symptoms, may have normal hematologic parameters, delaying recognition and appropriate treatment. Neurological and psychiatric symptoms, ranging from cognitive impairment and mood disorders to subacute combined degeneration (SCD) of the spinal cord, can precede hematologic abnormalities, leading to misdiagnosis or inappropriate management. The lack of a definitive gold standard test for cobalamin deficiency (CD) further complicates identification. Commonly used biomarkers, such as serum cobalamin, methylmalonic acid (MMA), homocysteine (Hcy), intrinsic factor antibodies (IFAs), and parietal cell antibodies (PCAs), each have limitations in diagnosing PA, especially in the absence of overt anemia. The variability in diagnostic criteria and cutoff values across studies adds to the challenge of achieving early and accurate diagnosis. This article reviews the complexities of diagnosing PA in neuropsychiatric patients, evaluates the limitations of current diagnostic methods, and emphasizes the need for a more comprehensive, standardized approach to early detection and treatment. Combining clinical awareness with improved biomarker interpretation is essential for preventing irreversible neurological damage and improving patient outcomes. Improved diagnostic protocols and further research are essential to optimize detection and minimize the risk of long-term neurological damage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.