ReviewF1000Research2016
Developing new therapeutic approaches for rheumatoid arthritis: the continuing challenges of clinical assessments.
Review in F1000Research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term effectiveness and safety of annual biosimilar Rituximab retreatment in seropositive Rheumatoid Arthritis: A 4-year real-world study.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Observational
- Value-Based Healthcare in Rheumatology: Axial Spondyloarthritis and Beyond.Current rheumatology reports · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The management of rheumatoid arthritis has changed dramatically over the last three decades. Improvements in clinical assessment have been a key driver of these changes. However, in the last five years, three areas of unresolved uncertainty have dominated specialist thinking in the field. These challenges comprise identifying the optimal management target, determining how best to reach this target by using intensive treatments, and individualising management because not all patients need or respond to identical treatments. The key problem that links each of these areas is balancing different types of evidence and is most readily appreciated in relation to treatment intensity. Giving more intensive therapy improves outcomes but also increases risks and, with biologic treatments, substantially increases drug costs. Specialists and healthcare funders need to agree on how best to rationalise optimal care for patients with what is most effective and safe and what is affordable.
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.