Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26881696›Full record

ArticleArthritis care & research2016

Comparison of the Utility and Validity of Three Scoring Tools to Measure Skin Involvement in Patients With Juvenile Dermatomyositis.

Raquel Campanilho-Marques, Beverley Almeida, Claire Deakin, Katie Arnold, Natacha Gallot, Maria de Iorio, Kiran Nistala, Clarissa A Pilkington, Lucy R Wedderburn, Juvenile Dermatomyositis Research Group

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Arthritis care & research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Myositis Multidisciplinary Clinic in a Tertiary Referral Center.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023
    Article
  5. Outcome Scores in Pediatric Rheumatology.Current rheumatology reports · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Raquel Campanilho-MarquesUniversity College London and Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Beverley AlmeidaUniversity College London and Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Claire DeakinUniversity College London, London, UK.
Katie ArnoldUniversity College London, London, UK.
Natacha GallotUniversity College London, London, UK.
Maria de IorioUniversity College London, London, UK.
Kiran NistalaUniversity College London, London, UK.
Clarissa A PilkingtonGreat Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Lucy R WedderburnArthritis Research UK Centre for Adolescent Rheumatology, University College London, University College London Hospitals, and Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK. l.wedderburn@ucl.ac.uk.
Juvenile Dermatomyositis Research Group
University College London · GBGreat Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Arthritis Research UK 14518Arthritis Research UK 20164Medical Research Council MR/N003322/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 085860Wellcome Trust 097259
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the abbreviated Cutaneous Assessment Tool (CAT), Disease Activity Score (DAS), and Myositis Intention to Treat Activity Index (MITAX) and correlate them with the physician's 10-cm skin visual analog scale (VAS) in order to define which tool best assesses skin disease in patients with juvenile dermatomyositis.

methodsA total of 71 patients recruited to the UK Juvenile Dermatomyositis Cohort and Biomarker Study were included and assessed for skin disease using the CAT, DAS, MITAX, and skin VAS. The Childhood Myositis Assessment Scale (CMAS), manual muscle testing of 8 groups (MMT8), muscle enzymes, inflammatory markers, and physician's global VAS were recorded. Relationships were evaluated using Spearman's correlations and predictors with linear regression. Interrater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients.

resultsAll 3 tools showed correlation with the physician's global VAS and skin VAS, with DAS skin showing the strongest correlation with skin VAS. DAS skin and CAT activity were inversely correlated with CMAS and MMT8, but these correlations were moderate. No correlations were found between the skin tools and inflammatory markers or muscle enzymes. DAS skin and CAT were the quickest to complete (mean ± SD 0.68 ± 0.1 minutes and 0.63 ± 0.1 minutes, respectively).

conclusionThe 3 skin tools were quick and easy to use. The DAS skin correlated best with the skin VAS. The addition of CAT in a bivariate model containing the physician's global VAS was a statistically significant estimator of skin VAS score. We propose that there is scope for a new skin tool to be devised and tested, which takes into account the strengths of the 3 existing tools.

Indexed as

Severity of Illness IndexChildDermatomyositisFemaleHumansIntention to Treat AnalysisMaleReproducibility of ResultsSkinSymptom AssessmentVisual Analog Scale

Identifiers

PMID26881696
PMCPMC5053292
OpenAlexW2282912630

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.