ArticleBJGP open2020
Understanding the patient voice in gout: a quantitative study conducted in Europe.
Article in BJGP open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health outcomes associated with patient-perceived gout aetiology: a cross-sectional analysis of the GAPP Study baseline data.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Trial
- 'All I Do Is Sit in a Chair Until the Pain Fades'-Experiences of Living With Gout.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2025Article
- Course and predictors of work productivity in gout - results from the NOR-Gout longitudinal 2-year treat-to-target study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Medical Students' Perspective and Knowledge of Asymptomatic Hyperuricemia and Gout Management: A Cross-Sectional Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Long-term opioid use among patients with chronic gout: a cross-sectional study of a sample cohort in South Korea.Clinical rheumatology · 2020Article
- Lessons and pitfalls from the 2020 Gout Clinical Practice Guideline presented in Atlanta at the ACR 2019.Clinical 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
9 authors at 6 institutions in 7 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough commonly diagnosed, gout often remains a poorly managed disease. This is partially due to a lack of awareness of the long-term effect of gout among patients and healthcare professionals.
aimTo understand unmet needs for patients and provide insight into achieving better treatment. DESIGN &
settingA quantitative online questionnaire collected from 1100 people with gout from 14 countries within Europe.
methodPatients were recruited to complete an online survey via healthcare professional (HCP) referral, patient associations, or market research panels. Patients were included if they had been diagnosed with gout by a physician. Prior to commencement, patients were made aware that this study was sponsored by Grünenthal. The responses collected were collated and analyses were performed.
resultsPatients had an average of 2.9 gout flares within a 12-month period. Although 79% of patients were satisfied with treatment, inadequate gout control was also reported by 71% of patients. Furthermore, 84% experienced moderate-to-severe pain with their most recent flare. Of those who acknowledged treatment dissatisfaction, only 24% discussed other options with their GP. Most patients reported irregular follow-up and serum uric acid (sUA) monitoring. In addition, loss of belief that more can be done was a key barrier for patients.
conclusionPatients reported severe pain and social burden, coupled with low treatment expectation and lack of awareness of target sUA. Education around knowing and reaching sUA target is needed so that patients can receive and GPs can deliver higher quality management.
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.