ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2016
Rheumatoid arthritis patient perceptions on the value of predictive testing for treatments: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2016. 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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Candidacy 2.0 (CC) - an enhanced theory of access to healthcare for chronic conditions: lessons from a critical interpretive synthesis on access to rheumatoid arthritis care.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Rheumatoid arthritis patients' perspective on the use of prediction models in clinical decision-making.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Factors influencing patient decision-making on a multimodal precision medicine algorithm for depression: a qualitative European multicentre study of the PROMPT consortium.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Variation in Anti-inflammatory, Anti-arthritic, and Antimicrobial Activities of Different Extracts of Common Egyptian Seaweeds with an Emphasis on Their Phytochemical and Heavy Metal Contents.Biological trace element research · 2023Article
- Article
- Ultrasound-guided lymph node biopsy sampling to study the immunopathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis: a well-tolerated valuable research tool.Arthritis research & therapy · 2022Article
- Towards Personalising the Use of Biologics in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2022Article
- Patient preferences for rheumatoid arthritis treatment.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2019Review
- A comprehensive care program achieves high remission rates in rheumatoid arthritis in a middle-income setting. Experience of a Center of Excellence in Colombia.Rheumatology international · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a long term condition that requires early treatment to control symptoms and improve long-term outcomes. Lack of response to RA treatments is not only a waste of healthcare resources, but also causes disability and distress to patients. Identifying biomarkers predictive of treatment response offers an opportunity to improve clinical decisions about which treatment to recommend in patients and could ultimately lead to better patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore the understanding of and factors affecting Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) patients' decisions around predictive treatment testing.
methodsA qualitative study was conducted with a purposive sample of 16 patients with RA from three major UK cities. Four focus groups explored patient perceptions of the use of biomarker tests to predict response to treatments. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis by three researchers.
resultsData were organised within three interlinking themes: [1] Perceptions of predictive tests and patient preference of tests; [2] Utility of the test to manage expectations; [3] The influence of the disease duration on take up of predictive testing. During consultations for predictive testing, patients felt they would need, first, careful explanations detailing the consequences of untreated RA and delayed treatment response and, second, support to balance the risks of tests, which might be invasive and/or only moderately accurate, with the potential benefits of better management of symptoms.
conclusionsThis study provides important insights into predictive testing. Besides supporting clinical decision making, the development of predictive testing in RA is largely supported by patients. Developing strategies which communicate risk information about predictive testing effectively while reducing the psychological burden associated with this information will be essential to maximise uptake.
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.