ArticleJMIR formative research2020
Reliability, Feasibility, and Patient Acceptance of an Electronic Version of a Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire for Routine Rheumatology Care: Validation and Patient Preference Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Elevated DAS28, CDAI, RAPID3 and five of seven RA core data set measures in patients with positive screens for anxiety, depression or fibromyalgia on an MDHAQ.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Predictors for response to electronic patient-reported outcomes in routine care in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a retrospective cohort study.Rheumatology international · 2023Article
- Who stop telemonitoring disease activity and who adhere: a prospective cohort study of patients with inflammatory arthritis.BMC rheumatology · 2022Article
- Cross-cultural and clinical validation of the MDHAQ/RAPID3 questionnaire in electronic format for a Brazilian population of patients with rheumatoid arthritis.Advances in rheumatology (London, England) · 2022Article
- Article
- Correlation of patient-reported routine assessment of patient index data with clinical measures of disease activity in psoriatic arthritis.International journal of rheumatic diseases · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA multidimensional health assessment questionnaire (MDHAQ) that was developed primarily for routine rheumatology care has advanced clinical research concerning disease burden, disability, and mortality in rheumatic diseases. Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), an index within the MDHAQ, is the most widely used index to assess rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical care in the United States, and it recognizes clinical status changes in all studied rheumatic diseases. MDHAQ physical function scores are far more significant in the prognosis of premature RA mortality than laboratory or imaging data. However, electronic medical records (EMRs) generally do not include patient questionnaires. An electronic MDHAQ (eMDHAQ), linked by fast healthcare interoperability resources (FIHR) to an EMR, can facilitate clinical and research advances.
objectiveThis study analyzed the reliability, feasibility, and patient acceptance of an eMDHAQ.
methodsSince 2006, all Rush University Medical Center rheumatology patients with all diagnoses have been asked to complete a paper MDHAQ at each routine care encounter. In April 2019, patients were invited to complete an eMDHAQ at the conclusion of the encounter. Analyses were conducted to determine the reliability of eMDHAQ versus paper MDHAQ scores, arithmetically and by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The feasibility of the eMDHAQ was analyzed based on the time for patient completion. The patient preference for the electronic or paper version was analyzed through a patient paper questionnaire.
resultsThe 98 study patients were a typical routine rheumatology patient group. Seven paper versus eMDHAQ scores were within 2%, differences neither clinically nor statistically significant. ICCs of 0.86-0.98 also indicated good to excellent reliability. Mean eMDHAQ completion time was a feasible 8.2 minutes. The eMDHAQ was preferred by 72% of patients; preferences were similar according to age and educational level.
conclusionsThe results on a paper MDHAQ versus eMDHAQ were similar. Most patients preferred an eMDHAQ.
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.