Observational studySeminars in arthritis and rheumatism2015
Do rheumatologists know best? An outcomes study of inconsistent users of disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs.
Observational study in Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Risk Factors for Falls in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2020Article
- Impact of Cost-Sharing Increases on Continuity of Specialty Drug Use: A Quasi-Experimental Study.Health services research · 2018Article
- Medication adherence has an impact on disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Patient preference and adherence · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveCurrent recommendations advocate treatment with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in all patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We analyzed short-term disease outcome in patients according to the consistency of DMARD use in a clinical rheumatology cohort.
methodsPatients in an RA registry (n = 617) were studied for DMARD use at semi-annual study time points during the first 18 months of follow-up and were divided into 4 groups according to the number of study time points with any DMARD use [0-1 study time points (n = 31), 2 study time points (n = 24), 3 study time points (n = 77), and 4 study time points (n = 485)]. The primary outcome analyses were performed at 24 months and included Disease Activity Score 28 (DAS28-CRP), modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (MHAQ) change, Short Form Health Survey-12 physical and mental summary scores (SF-12 PCS, SF-12 MCS), EuroQol 5-Dimensional health index (EQ-5D), and radiographic progression. Unadjusted, adjusted, and analyses stratified for seropositivity and disease activity were performed. A secondary analysis investigated 36-month outcomes.
resultsNo significant 24-month outcome differences could be found between the DMARD use categories. For seropositive patients, there was evidence of a linear trend for SF-12 PCS (p = 0.02) and EQ-5D (p = 0.01) with worse outcomes for inconsistent DMARD users. At 36 months, there was a linear trend for higher DAS28-CRP scores for inconsistent users (p < 0.01).
conclusionsOverall, we found poor correlation between inconsistent DMARD use and short-term disease outcome. However, outcome in the longer term could be negatively influenced by inconsistent DMARD use, as well as short-term outcome in seropositive patients.
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.