ArticleArthritis care & research2019
Qualitative Exploration of Triangulated, Shared Decision-Making in Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Article in Arthritis care & research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- First-line tumor necrosis factor inhibitor versus abatacept treatment choice in real-world patients with anticitrullinated protein antibody- and rheumatoid factor-positive rheumatoid arthritis.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Article
- A Web-Based Patient Empowerment to Medication Adherence Program for Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Feasibility Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR formative research · 2023Article
- Adaptation of a Shared Decision-Making Tool for Early Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment Decisions with Indigenous Patients.The patient · 2022Article
- Development of an Implementation Strategy for Patient Decision Aids in Rheumatoid Arthritis Through Application of the Behavior Change Wheel.ACR open rheumatology · 2021Article
- New galaxies in the universe of shared decision-making and rheumatoid arthritis.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2020Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTreat-to-target implementation in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) requires a shared decision-making (SDM) process. However, ability to pay is a major determinant of patient choice, but how this factor affects SDM is under-explored.
methodsVisits at 4 RA clinics during which patients faced a decision to change their treatment were audiotaped between May 2016 and June 2017. Audiotapes were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using qualitative framework analysis.
resultsA total of 156 visits were analyzed. Most patients with RA, except those with effective insurance coverage, had deliberations disrupted or sidelined by third-party insurance providers having power to authorize the preferred disease-modifying antirheumatic drug choice. This triangulated SDM complicated efficiency in deliberations and timely treatment and was a barrier to shared engagement about health risks and symptom improvement typically found in patient-provider dyads.
conclusionRheumatology care providers should aim to incorporate treatment costs and ability to pay into their deliberations so that individualized out-of-pocket estimates can be considered during triangulated SDM at the point-of-care.
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.