Trial reportClinical rheumatology2015
An Internet-based technique for the identification of persons with symptoms of inflammatory polyarthritis of less than 12 weeks.
Trial report in Clinical rheumatology, 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.
- Barriers to the Diagnosis of Early Inflammatory Arthritis: A Literature Review.Open access rheumatology : research and reviews · 2023Review
- Review
- Increased circulating interleukin 10-secreting B cells in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Identifying persons with early rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a major challenge. The role of the Internet in making decisions about seeking care has not been studied. We developed a method for early diagnosis and referral using the Arthritis Foundation's website. A person with less than 3 months of joint pain symptom who has not yet sought medical attention was screened. Prescreened persons are linked to a self-scoring questionnaire and get a "likelihood" of RA statement. If "likely," the person is offered a free evaluation and biomarker testing performed by Quest Diagnostics. The system available only to Massachusetts's residents yielded a small steady flow of screen-positive individuals. Over 21 months, 43,244 persons took the Arthritis Foundation website prescreening questionnaire; 196 were from Massachusetts and 60 took the self-scoring algorithm. Of the 48 who screened positive, 29 set up an appointment for a free evaluation, but six never came in. Twenty-four subjects were evaluated and diagnosed independently by three rheumatologists. One met the 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for RA and two met the 2010 ACR/EULAR RA criteria. The 24 examined individuals were contacted at a minimum of 1 year and asked to redo the case-finding questionnaire and asked about their health resource utilization during the interval. Seventeen of the 24 subjects responded, and 10 had seen a health professional. Three of the 17 had a diagnosis of RA; all were on at least methotrexate. Internet case finding was useful in identifying new potential RA cases. The system's performance characteristics are theoretically limited only by the number of study sites available. However, the major barrier may be that seeing a health professional is not a priority for many individuals with early symptoms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25339123What 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.