ArticleRMD open2015
Monitoring rheumatoid arthritis using an algorithm based on patient-reported outcome measures: a first step towards personalised healthcare.
Article in RMD open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Responsiveness and sensitivity of PROMs to change in disease activity status in early and established rheumatoid arthritis.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Trial
- Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity: Rasch measurement theory to identify items and domains.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Combining patient-reported outcome measures to screen for active disease in rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis.RMD open · 2024Article
- At-home blood self-sampling in rheumatology: a qualitative study with patients and health care professionals.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Telemedicine for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic; a positive experience in the Netherlands.Rheumatology international · 2021Observational
- Telemedicine in the management of rheumatoid arthritis: maintaining disease control with less health-care utilization.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2021Article
- Observational
- Acceptance, Usage, and Barriers of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes Among German Rheumatologists: Survey Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
- Viewpoint on Time Series and Interrupted Time Series Optimum Modeling for Predicting Arthritic Disease Outcomes.Current rheumatology reports · 2020Review
- Call for action: how to improve use of patient-reported outcomes to guide clinical decision making in rheumatoid arthritis.Rheumatology international · 2018Review
- Multidisciplinary Management of Spondyloarthritis-Related Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease.Advances in therapy · 2018Article
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
objectivesThe objective of this proof of concept study was to evaluate alerts generated by a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM)-based algorithm for monitoring patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
methodsThe algorithm was constructed using an example PROM score of an equally weighted mean of visual analogue scale (VAS) general health, VAS disease activity and VAS pain. Based on the PROM score, red flags are generated in 2 instances: the target level of disease activity is not met; change in disease activity surpasses an early alert threshold. To reduce false alarms, 3 consecutive red flags are needed to trigger an alert to the physician. Time series data from patients included consecutively in the practice-based Nijmegen Early RA cohort were analysed to select an appropriate autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model. This allowed for advanced interpolation of PROM scores and weekly data evaluation. Alerts were evaluated against disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD)/biologic medication intensification registered in the cohort.
resultsData of 165 patients followed in their second year postdiagnosis were analysed. In 89.8% of 716 visits, the algorithm did not generate an alert and medication was not escalated. Positive predictive value, sensitivity and specificity were 24.6%, 55.6% and 69.7%, respectively. Comparable performance was found when analyses were stratified for baseline Disease Activity Score 28-joint count (DAS28) level.
conclusionsWhen using the algorithm to screen scheduled visits, the overall chance of missing patients in need of medication intensification is low. These findings provide evidence that an off-site monitoring system could aid in optimising the number and timing of face-to-face consultations of patients with their rheumatologists.
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.