Observational studyRheumatology international2017
Clinical utility of the ASDAS index in comparison with BASDAI in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (Axis Study).
Observational study in Rheumatology international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-Analysis of Changes in the Number and Proportion of Regulatory T Cells in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis.BioMed research international · 2020Pooled it
- The value of EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS as a patient-reported outcome measure for patients with ankylosing spondylitis in routine healthcare: an evaluation of construct validity and responsiveness based on the Swedish Rheumatology Quality Register.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- The predictability of ASDAS on drug survival in patients with ankylosing spondylitis on biologic therapy: data from the KOBIO registry.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2023Article
- Use of Quantitative Vertebral Bone Marrow Fat Fraction to Assess Disease Activity and Chronicity in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis.Korean journal of radiology · 2021Article
- Serum galectin-3 concentrations in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2019Article
- Sclerostin rather than Dickkopf-1 is associated with mSASSS but not with disease activity score in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.Clinical rheumatology · 2019Article
- The Patient-Reported Outcomes Thermometer-5-Item Scale (5T-PROs): Validation of a New Tool for the Quick Assessment of Overall Health Status in Painful Rheumatic Diseases.Pain research & management · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of the study was to study the clinical utility of the Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) for the assessment of disease activity in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients, compared to the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Activity Index (BASDAI). This was a prospective longitudinal observational study in patients with AS (NY-modified criteria) from 23 Spanish centers. Physical and analytical data; global, lumbar, and nocturnal pain; ASDAS, BASDAI and minimally acceptable clinical status (PASS) were collected. Psychometric characteristics of both indexes were analyzed: construct validity (convergent and divergent), discriminant capacity, criterion validity (global physician and patient assessment), and sensitivity to change. The study involved 127 patients (19.7% attrition). Both BASDAI and ASDAS showed a higher correlation with patient's global assessment (r = 0.76 and 0.70, respectively) than with physician's global assessment (r = 0.67 and 0.57). Both scores allowed discriminating patients with an acceptable clinical status, although BASDAI to a greater extent than ASDAS (Cohen δ 1.72 vs 0.88 for the medical PASS). Both scores showed sensitivity to change in patients who changed from an unacceptable symptomatic state to acceptable according to PASS criteria (physician and patient) and by BASDAI 50 response criteria (Cohen δ > 0.80). BASDAI showed better criterion validity than ASDAS, both for the patient PASS (AUC 0.85 vs 0.79) and for the physician's (AUC 0.90 vs 0.79). ASDAS shows adequate performance for disease activity in patients with AS; however, in this study, its psychometric properties do not present advantages over BASDAI in terms of criterion validity, sensitivity to change or discriminative capacity; replacement of BASDAI by ASDAS is not supported by the data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28918450What 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.