Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33888149›Full record

ArticleArthritis research & therapy2021

Performance of the UCLA Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium Gastrointestinal Tract 2.0 instrument as a clinical decision aid in the routine clinical care of patients with systemic sclerosis.

Norina Zampatti, Alexandru Garaiman, Suzana Jordan, Rucsandra Dobrota, Mike Oliver Becker, Britta Maurer, Oliver Distler, Carina Mihai

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Systemic sclerosis.Lancet (London, England) · 2023
    Review
  5. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Norina ZampattiDepartment of Rheumatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Gloriastrasse 25, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Alexandru GaraimanDepartment of Rheumatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Gloriastrasse 25, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Suzana JordanDepartment of Rheumatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Gloriastrasse 25, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Rucsandra DobrotaDepartment of Rheumatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Gloriastrasse 25, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Mike Oliver BeckerDepartment of Rheumatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Gloriastrasse 25, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Britta MaurerDepartment of Rheumatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Gloriastrasse 25, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Oliver DistlerDepartment of Rheumatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Gloriastrasse 25, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
Carina MihaiDepartment of Rheumatology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Gloriastrasse 25, 8091, Zurich, Switzerland. Carmen-Marina.Mihai@usz.ch.ORCID 0000-0002-8627-8817
University of Zurich · CHCarol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy · ROUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThe University of California Los Angeles Scleroderma Clinical Trial Consortium Gastrointestinal Tract Instrument 2.0 (UCLA GIT 2.0) is validated to capture gastrointestinal (GI) tract morbidity in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). The aims of this study were to determine in a large SSc cohort if the UCLA GIT 2.0 is able to discriminate patients for whom a rheumatologist with experience in SSc would recommend an esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (EGD), and if it could identify patients with endoscopically proven esophagitis or with any pathologic finding on EGD.

methodsWe selected patients fulfilling the ACR/EULAR 2013 criteria for SSc from our EUSTAR center having completed at least once the UCLA GIT 2.0 questionnaire, and we collected data on gastrointestinal symptoms and EGD from their medical charts. We analyzed by general linear mixed effect models several parameters, including UCLA GIT 2.0, considered as potentially associated with the indication of EGD, as well as with endoscopic esophagitis and any pathologic finding on EGD.

resultsWe identified 346 patients (82.7% female, median age 63 years, median disease duration 10 years, 23% diffuse cutaneous SSc) satisfying the inclusion criteria, who completed UCLA GIT 2.0 questionnaires at 940 visits. EGD was recommended at 169 visits. In multivariable analysis, UCLA GIT 2.0 and some of its subscales (reflux, distention/bloating, social functioning) were associated with the indication of EGD. In 177 EGD performed in 145 patients, neither the total ULCA GIT 2.0 score nor any of its subscales were associated with endoscopic esophagitis, nor with any pathologic EGD findings.

conclusionsIn a real-life setting, the UCLA GIT 2.0 and its reflux subscale were able to discriminate patients with SSc who had an indication for EGD, but did not correlate with findings in EGD. We conclude that, while using the UCLA GIT 2.0 in the routine care of patients with SSc may help the rheumatologist to better understand the burden of GI symptoms in the individual patient, it should not be used as a stand-alone instrument to identify an indication of EGD.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal DiseasesScleroderma, SystemicDecision Support TechniquesFemaleGastrointestinal TractHumansMaleMiddle AgedSeverity of Illness IndexSurveys and QuestionnairesCohort studyEndoscopyGastrointestinalSystemic sclerosisUCLA GIT 2.0

Identifiers

PMID33888149
PMCPMC8061014
OpenAlexW3131566940

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.