SynthesisRheumatology (Oxford, England)2022
Psychometric properties of outcome measurement instruments for ANCA-associated vasculitis: a systematic literature review.
Synthesis in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures in patients with anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody associated vasculitis.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2024Pooled it
- 'Am I doing this right?' Physician perceptions of the global assessment in clinical trials of systemic sclerosis.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Impact of mepolizumab on the AAV-PRO questionnaire in eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis: data from a European multicentre study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Relapses and serious adverse events during rituximab maintenance therapy in ANCA-associated vasculitis: a multicentre retrospective study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Treatment goals in ANCA-associated vasculitis: defining success in a new era.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Validation of the Italian version of the ANCA-associated vasculitis patient-reported outcome (AAV-PRO) questionnaire.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2024Article
- Article
- Patient-reported outcomes in ANCA-associated vasculitis: a cross-sectional study to explore the interactions between patients' and physicians' perspectives.Rheumatology international · 2023Article
- Development and internal validation of a model to predict long-term survival of ANCA associated vasculitis.Rheumatology and immunology research · 2023Article
- How is the patient perspective captured in ANCA-associated vasculitis research? An integrative review.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo systematically review the psychometric properties of outcome measurement instruments used in ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV).
methodsMedline, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus and Web of Science were searched from inception to 14 July 2020 for validation studies of instruments used in AAV. Following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and OMERACT frameworks, different psychometric properties (validity, reliability, responsiveness and feasibility) were summarized. Risk of bias was assessed according to the COSMIN checklist.
resultsFrom 2505 articles identified, 32 met the predefined selection criteria, providing information on 22 instruments assessing disease activity (n = 7), damage (n = 2), activity and damage (n = 1), health-related quality of life (HRQoL; n = 9) and function (n = 3). Most of the instruments were tested in AAV as a group or in granulomatosis with polyangiitis only.The BVAS, any version, the Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI) and the AAV-Patient-Reported Outcome (AAV-PRO) have been more extensively validated than the other instruments. BVAS for Wegener Granulomatosis (BVAS/WG) has been shown to be valid for measuring disease activity [correlation with Physician global assessment (r = 0.90)], reliability (inter-observer intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.97), responsiveness and feasibility. For damage, VDI was shown to be moderately valid (correlations with BVAS version 3 at 6 months r = 0.14, BVAS/WG at 1 year r = 0.40 and 5 years r = 0.20), and feasible. For HRQoL, AAV-PRO demonstrated validity (correlations of the six AAV-PRO domains with EQ-5D-5L: -0.78 to -0.55; discrimination between active disease and remission, P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). The overall performance of instruments assessing function was low-to-moderate.
conclusionAmong the 22 outcome measurement instruments used for AAV, BVAS (any version), VDI and AAV-PRO had the strongest psychometric properties.
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.