Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32758350›Full record

Trial reportHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2020

Different corticosteroid induction regimens in children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: the SIRJIA mixed-methods feasibility study.

Ashley P Jones, Dannii Clayton, Gloria Nkhoma, Frances C Sherratt, Matthew Peak, Simon R Stones, Louise Roper, Bridget Young, Flora McErlane, Tracy Moitt and 6 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Juvenile idiopathic arthritis in Jordan: single center experience.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2021
    Article
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

16 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Ashley P JonesLiverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, a member of the Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5253-730X
Dannii ClaytonLiverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, a member of the Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3535-3466
Gloria NkhomaLiverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, a member of the Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7771-2626
Frances C SherrattSchool of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4147-9305
Matthew PeakAlder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust, a member of the Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1909-3211
Simon R StonesSchool of Healthcare, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5943-1310
Louise RoperSchool of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2918-7628
Bridget YoungSchool of Psychology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6041-9901
Flora McErlanePaediatric Rheumatology, Great North Children's Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8434-1771
Tracy MoittLiverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, a member of the Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5579-996X
Athimalaipet V RamananBristol Royal Hospital for Children, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8663-2401
Helen E FosterPaediatric Rheumatology, Great North Children's Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8824-2546
Paula R WilliamsonLiverpool Clinical Trials Centre, University of Liverpool, a member of the Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9802-6636
Samundeeswari DeepakPaediatric Rheumatology, Nottingham Children's Hospital, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3222-1441
Michael W BeresfordFaculty of Health and Life Science, University of Liverpool and Alder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust, members of Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5400-9911
Eileen M BaildamAlder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust, a member of the Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8463-6388
University of Liverpool · GBAlder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBQueen's Medical Centre · GBUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Leeds · GB

Funding

Department of Health 14/167/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the UK, juvenile idiopathic arthritis is the most common inflammatory disorder in childhood, affecting 10 : 100,000 children and young people aged < 16 years each year, with a population prevalence of around 1 : 1000. Corticosteroids are commonly used to treat juvenile idiopathic arthritis; however, there is currently a lack of consensus as to which corticosteroid induction regimen should be used with various disease subtypes and severities of juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

objectiveThe main study objective was to determine the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial to compare the different corticosteroid induction regimens in children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

designThis was a mixed-methods study. Work packages included a literature review; qualitative interviews with children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis and their families; a questionnaire survey and screening log to establish current UK practice; a consensus meeting with health-care professionals, children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and their families to establish the primary outcome; a feasibility study to pilot data capture and to collect data for future sample size calculations; and a final consensus meeting to establish the final protocol.

settingThe setting was rheumatology clinics across the UK.

participantsChildren, young people and their families who attended clinics and health-care professionals took part in this mixed-methods study.

interventionsThis study observed methods of prescribing corticosteroids across the UK.

main outcome measuresThe main study outcomes were the acceptability of a future trial for children, young people, their families and health-care professionals, and the feasibility of delivering such a trial.

resultsQualitative interviews identified differences in the views of children, young people and their families on a randomised controlled trial and potential barriers to recruitment. A total of 297 participants were screened from 13 centres in just less than 6 months. In practice, all routes of corticosteroid administration were used, and in all subtypes of juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Intra-articular corticosteroid injection was the most common treatment. The questionnaire surveys showed the varying clinical practice across the UK, but established intra-articular corticosteroids as the treatment control for a future trial. The primary outcome of choice for children, young people, their families and health-care professionals was the Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score, 71-joint count. However, results from the feasibility study showed that, owing to missing blood test data, the clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score should be used. The Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score, 71-joint count, and the clinical Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score are composite disease activity scoring systems for juvenile arthritis. Two final trial protocols were established for a future randomised controlled trial. LIMITATIONS: Fewer clinics were included in this feasibility study than originally planned, limiting the ability to draw strong conclusions about these units to take part in future research.

conclusionsA definitive randomised controlled trial is likely to be feasible based on the findings from this study; however, important recommendations should be taken into account when planning such a trial. FUTURE WORK: This mixed-methods study has laid down the foundations to develop the evidence base in this area and conducting a randomised control trial to compare different corticosteroid induction regimens in children and young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis is likely to be feasible. STUDY REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16649996.

fundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in

Indexed as

AdolescentAdrenal Cortex HormonesArthritis, JuvenileChildClinical ProtocolsDrug Administration RoutesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansInjections, Intra-ArticularMaleOutcome Assessment, Health CarePractice Patterns, Physicians'Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomAdrenal Cortex HormonesARTHRITISCHILDCONSENSUSCORTICOSTEROIDSFEASIBILITYJUVENILEJUVENILE IDIOPATHIC ARTHRITISMIXED METHODSRHEUMATOLOGYSURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES

Identifiers

PMID32758350
PMCPMC7443738
OpenAlexW3048276557

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.