ArticleRheumatology and therapy2015
Consensus Decision Models for Biologics in Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis: Recommendations of a Multidisciplinary Working Party.
Article in Rheumatology and therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Use of Decision-Analytic Models in Atopic Eczema: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Pooled it
- Estimating pain visual analogue scale from health assessment questionnaire for rheumatoid arthritis with beta mixture models.Rheumatology international · 2025Trial
- Improving the standard of care for patients with spondyloarthritis-related immune inflammatory conditions: results of a Delphi study and proposal for early detection.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2020Article
- Novel systemic therapies in atopic dermatitis: what do we need to fulfil the promise of a treatment revolution?F1000Research · 2019Review
- Observational
- Mapping between HAQ-DI and EQ-5D-5L in a Chinese patient population.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2018Article
- Conceptual model for the health technology assessment of current and novel interventions in rheumatoid arthritis.PloS one · 2018Article
- How to Appropriately Extrapolate Costs and Utilities in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Article
- Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of biologic treatments for psoriatic arthritis: can we make better use of patient data registries?Clinical rheumatology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionBiologic therapies are efficacious but costly. A number of health economic models have been developed to determine the most cost-effective way of using them in the treatment pathway. These models have produced conflicting results, driven by differences in assumptions, model structure, and data, which undermine the credibility of funding decisions based on modeling studies. A Consensus Working Party met to discuss recommendations and approaches for future models of biologic therapies.
methodsOur working party consisted of clinical specialists, modelers, and policy makers. Two 1-day meetings were held for members to arrive at consensus positions on model structure, assumptions, and appropriate data sources. These views were guided by clinical aspects of rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis and the principles of evidence-based medicine. Where opinions differed, we sought to identify a research agenda that would generate the evidence needed to reach consensus.
resultsWe gained consensus in four areas of model development: initial response to treatment; long-term disease progression; lifetime costs and benefits; and model structure. Consensus was also achieved on some key parameters such as choices of outcome measures, methods for extrapolation beyond trial data, and treatment switching. A research agenda to support further consensus was also identified.
conclusionConsensus guidance that fully reflects current evidence and clinical understanding was gained successfully. In addition, research needs have been identified. Such guidance can be updated as evidence develops and policy questions change and need not be prescriptive as long as deviations from consensus are clearly explained and justified.
fundingArthritis Research UK and the UK Medical Research Council Network of Hubs for Trials Methodology Research.
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.