Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31276089›Full record

ArticleRheumatology advances in practice2018

Primary care challenges in diagnosing and referring patients with suspected rheumatoid arthritis: a national cross-sectional GP survey.

Ian C Scott, Navjeet Mangat, Alex MacGregor, Karim Raza, Christian D Mallen, Samantha L Hider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Rheumatology advances in practice, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Identifying people at risk of rheumatoid arthritis in primary care: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Barriers to the Diagnosis of Early Inflammatory Arthritis: A Literature Review.Open access rheumatology : research and reviews · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ian C ScottArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Primary Care Sciences, Keele University, Newcastle-under-Lyme.
Navjeet MangatArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Primary Care Sciences, Keele University, Newcastle-under-Lyme.
Alex MacGregorNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich.
Karim RazaInstitute of Inflammation and Ageing, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham.
Christian D MallenArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Primary Care Sciences, Keele University, Newcastle-under-Lyme.
Samantha L HiderArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Research Institute for Primary Care & Health Sciences, Primary Care Sciences, Keele University, Newcastle-under-Lyme.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveNational guidelines advocate referring patients with persistent synovitis to rheumatology within 3 working days of presentation to primary care. This occurs infrequently. We aimed to identify modifiable barriers to early referral of suspected RA patients among English general practitioners (GPs).

methodsWe carried out a national cross-sectional survey of 1388 English GPs (RA Questionnaire for GPs [RA-QUEST] study). Questions addressed GPs' confidence in diagnosing RA, clinical factors influencing RA diagnosis/referral, timeliness of referrals and secondary care access. Data were captured using 10-point visual analog scales, five-point Likert scales, yes/no questions or free text, and were analysed descriptively.

resultsSmall joint swelling and pain were most influential in diagnosing RA (91 and 84% rated the importance of these as 4 or 5 on a five-point Likert scale, respectively); investigations including RF (61% rating 4 or 5) and anti-CCP antibody (72% rating 4 or 5) were less influential. Patient history had the greatest impact on the decision to refer (92% rating this 4 or 5 on a 5-point Likert scale), with acute phase markers (74% rating 4 or 5) and serology (76% rating 4 or 5) less impactful. Despite the importance placed on history and examination, only 26% referred suspected RA immediately without investigations; 95% of GPs organizing further tests opted to test for RF.

conclusionFor suspected RA patients to be referred within 3 days of presentation to primary care there needs to be a paradigm shift in GPs' approaches to making referral decisions, with a focus on clinical history and examination findings, and not the use of investigations such as RF.

Indexed as

guidelinesprimary carereferralrheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

PMID31276089
PMCPMC6597052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.