ArticleClinical rheumatology2021
How do patients define Raynaud's phenomenon? Differences between primary and secondary disease.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systemic sclerosis: pathogenic mechanisms and their implications for treatment.Seminars in immunopathology · 2025Review
- Physical activity, sedentary behaviour and health-related quality of life in 929 women with primary Raynaud's phenomenon.Clinical rheumatology · 2025Article
- Development and validation of the RQLQ: a Raynaud's disease-specific measure of health-related quality of life.Clinical rheumatology · 2024Article
- An Experimental Phototherapy Device for Studying the Effects of Blue Light on Patients with Raynaud's Phenomenon.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- Construct validity and reliability of the Assessment of Systemic Sclerosis-Associated Raynaud's Phenomenon (ASRAP) questionnaire.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Differences in symptom experience among patients with systemic sclerosis: a cluster analytic approach to identifying subgroups.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Practical management of Raynaud's phenomenon - a primer for practicing physicians.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2022Review
- Symptom experience of limited cutaneous systemic sclerosis from the Patients' perspective: A qualitative studySeminars in arthritis and rheumatism · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
objectivesTo examine how people define Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) based on their lived experiences and explore if differences exist depending on primary or secondary RP diagnosis.
methodAn international survey was sent to people with RP through health systems, foundations, and social media. Qualitative coding of responses to an open text question regarding one's own definition of RP was performed and themes were identified. The prevalence of themes among the sample and then comparisons between themes among people who self-reported primary versus secondary diagnosis of RP were performed.
resultsThere were 1345 respondents from 45 countries (mean age 51.5 years, 93% female) who defined RP in their own words; 17% reported primary RP and 83% reported secondary RP (69% of secondary RP was scleroderma-related, n = 927). Over half defined their RP by describing the body parts affected, color changes, pain, and triggers or situations in which an episode occurs. Patients with primary RP more frequently defined RP in terms of its impact on function/quality of life and pain compared to those with secondary RP (34.5% versus 25.3%, respectively, p=0.004; 54.0% versus 46.8%, p=0.05). Patients with secondary RP more frequently included specific body parts, color change, the management of attacks, and other digital vascular complications in their definition of RP.
conclusionsWe have identified differences in how people with primary and secondary RP define RP, in terms of how they feel and function. Our findings have implications for the domains of outcome measures for assessing RP within different patient populations. Key Points • Pain is more often mentioned in primary RP and color change in secondary RP. • Over 25% of patients included reduced the quality of life as part of their RP definition. • The concept of "attack" is used to define RP by only 2% of patients.
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.