Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34799278›Full record

ReviewBest practice & research. Clinical rheumatology2021

Review: Outcome measures in calcium pyrophosphate deposition.

Ken Cai, Sara K Tedeschi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Ken CaiBone and Joint Research Group, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand; Department of Rheumatology, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, Australia.
Sara K TedeschiDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation and Immunity, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: stedeschi1@bwh.harvard.edu.

Funding

Studying pseudogout using naturallanguage processing and novelimaging approachesK23AR075070 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI TEDESCHI, SARA K. · 2019 to 2023
$937k
NIAMS NIH HHS K23 AR075070NIAMS NIH HHS L30 AR070514
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review highlights outcomes for patients with calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) reported in prior studies and underscores challenges to assessing outcomes of this condition. Prior clinical studies of interventions for CPPD focused on joint damage and calcification on imaging tests, joint pain, swelling, and inflammatory biomarkers. Qualitative interviews with patients with CPPD and healthcare providers additionally identified flares, overall function, and use of analgesic medications as important outcomes. Imaging evidence of joint damage and calcification is likely to be outcomes in future clinical studies of CPPD, though reliability and sensitivity to change in CPPD require further testing for several imaging modalities. Challenges to outcome measurement in CPPD include questions of attribution of signs and symptoms to CPPD versus co-existing forms of arthritis, lack of therapies to prevent or dissolve calcium pyrophosphate crystal deposition, absence of validated patient- or physician-reported CPPD outcome measures, and scarcity of large cohorts in which to study outcomes of different clinical presentations of CPPD.

Indexed as

Calcium PyrophosphateChondrocalcinosisHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareReproducibility of ResultsCalcium PyrophosphateCalcium pyrophosphate deposition diseaseCPPDOutcome measuresPseudogout

Identifiers

PMID34799278
PMCPMC8678359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.