ArticleRMD open2019
Validating 10-joint juvenile arthritis disease activity score cut-offs for disease activity levels in non-systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
Article in RMD open, 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.
- The feasibility of existing JADAS10 cut-off values in clinical practice: a study of data from The Finnish Rheumatology Quality Register.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2023Article
- Impaired cardiorespiratory and neuromuscular fitness in children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a cross-sectional case-control study in the era of biologic drug therapies.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2023Article
- Current Validated Clinical and Patient Reported Disease Outcome Measures in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.Open access rheumatology : research and reviews · 2023Review
- Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on juvenile idiopathic arthritis presentation and research recruitment: results from the CAPRI registry.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- Treating juvenile idiopathic arthritis to target: what is the optimal target definition to reach all goals?Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To validate cut-offs of the Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score 10 (JADAS10) and clinical JADAS10 (cJADAS10) and to compare them with other patient cohorts. Methods: In a national multicentre study, cross-sectional data on recent visits of 337 non-systemic patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) were collected from nine paediatric outpatient units. The cut-offs were tested with receiver operating characteristic curve-based methods, and too high, too low and correct classification rates (CCRs) were calculated. Results: Our earlier presented JADAS10 cut-offs seemed feasible based on the CCRs, but the cut-off values between low disease activity (LDA) and moderate disease activity (MDA) were adjusted. When JADAS10 cut-offs for clinically inactive disease (CID) were increased to 1.5 for patients with oligoarticular disease and 2.7 for patients with polyarticular disease, as recently suggested in a large multinational register study, altogether 11 patients classified as CID by the cut-off had one active joint. We suggest JADAS10 cut-off values for oligoarticular/polyarticular disease to be in CID: 0.0-0.5/0.0-0.7, LDA: 0.6-3.8/0.8-5.1 and MDA: >3.8/5.1. Suitable cJADAS10 cut-offs are the same as JADAS10 cut-offs in oligoarticular disease. In polyarticular disease, cJADAS10 cut-offs are 0-0.7 for CID, 0.8-5.0 for LDA and >5.0 for MDA. Conclusion: International consensus on JADAS cut-off values is needed, and such a cut-off for CID should preferably exclude patients with active joints in the CID group.
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.