ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2021
A comparison of physical function instruments in psoriatic arthritis: HAQ-DI vs MDHAQ vs PROMIS10 global physical health.
Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2021. 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.
- Trial
- Construct validity and responsiveness of EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS in psoriatic arthritis: an evaluation based on the Swedish Rheumatology Quality Register.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Psoriatic arthritis phenotype clusters and their association with treatment response: a real-world longitudinal cohort study from the psoriatic arthritis research consortium.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2025Article
- Validity and reliability of the Duruöz Hand Index in patients with psoriatic arthritis.Rheumatology international · 2024Article
- Responsiveness and Minimum Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Among Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: A Prospective Cohort Study.Arthritis care & research · 2023Article
- OMERACT Filter 2.1 instrument selection for physical function domain in psoriatic arthritis: Provisional endorsement for HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF.Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPhysical function is a core outcome in PsA. We examined the construct validity and responsiveness of three commonly used instruments to assess physical function in PsA: HAQ disability index (HAQ-DI), MultiDimensional HAQ (MDHAQ) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Global-10.
methodsBetween 2016 and 2019, patients with PsA were enrolled in the Psoriatic Arthritis Research Consortium longitudinal cohort study in the USA. Correlations were calculated at baseline and among change scores using Spearman's correlation coefficient. Standardized response means were calculated. Agreement with the 20% improvement cut-off was used to determine the potential effect of using MDHAQ or the PROMIS Global-10 physical health (GPH) subscore in place of HAQ-DI when assessing the ACR20.
resultsA total of 274 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age of patients was 49 years and 51% were male. At baseline, the mean HAQ-DI was 0.6 (s.d. 0.6; range 0-3), the mean MDHAQ was 1.8 (s.d. 1.6; range 0-10) and the mean GPH T-score was 43.4 (s.d. 9.3; range 0-100). All three instruments were strongly correlated at baseline (rho 0.75-0.85). Change scores were moderately correlated (rho 0.42-0.71). Among therapy initiators, the mean change between two visits in HAQ-DI, MDHAQ and GPH was -0.1 (s.d. 0.4), -0.2 (s.d. 1.2) and 2.5 (s.d. 6.1), respectively. The standardized response means were 0.18, 0.16 and 0.41, respectively.
conclusionThe three instruments tested are not directly interchangeable but have overall similar levels of responsiveness.
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.