ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2022
Gathering patients and rheumatologists' perceptions to improve outcomes in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies.
Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTherapeutic targets in Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies (IIM) are based on the opinions of physicians/specialists, which may not reflect the main concerns of patients. The authors, therefore, assessed the outcome concerns of patients with IIM and compared them with the concerns of rheumatologists in order to develop an IIM outcome standard set.
methodsNinety-three IIM patients, 51 rheumatologists, and one physiotherapist were invited to participate. An open questionnaire was initially applied. The top 10 answers were selected and applied in a multiple-choice questionnaire, inquiring about the top 3 major concerns. Answers were compared, and the agreement rate was calculated. Concerns were gathered in an IIM outcome standard set with validated measures.
resultsThe top three outcome concerns raised by patients were medication side effects/muscle weakness/prevention functionality loss. The top three concerns among rheumatologists were to prevent loss of functionality/to ensure the quality of life/to achieve disease remission. Other's outcomes concerns only pointed out by patients were muscle pain/diffuse pain/skin lesions/fatigue. The agreement rate between both groups was 41%. Assessment of these parameters guided the development of an IIM standard set which included Myositis Disease Activity Assessment Visual Analogue Scale/Manual Muscle Testing/fatigue and pain Global Visual Analogue Scale/Health Assessment Questionnaire/level of physical activity.
conclusionThe authors propose a novel standard set to be pursued in IIM routine follow-up, which includes not only the main patients/rheumatologist outcome concerns but also additional important outcomes only indicated by patients. Future studies are necessary to confirm if this comprehensive approach will result in improved adherence and ultimately in better assistance.
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.