ArticleACR open rheumatology2022
A Population-Based Study Evaluating Retention in Rheumatology Care Among Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biopsychosocial Determinants, Diet Quality, Gastrointestinal Health, and Disease Activity in Adults With Rheumatoid Arthritis: Cross-Sectional Descriptive Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- A theory of change for patient-initiated follow-up care in rheumatoid arthritis.BMC rheumatology · 2025Article
- Emergency department utilization by persons with rheumatoid arthritis: a population-based cohort study.Rheumatology international · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe study objective was to assess adherence to system-level performance measures measuring retention in rheumatology care and disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
methodsWe used a validated health administrative data case definition to identify individuals with RA in Ontario, Canada, between 2002 and 2014 who had at least 5 years of potential follow-up prior to 2019. During the first 5 years following diagnosis, we assessed whether patients were seen by a rheumatologist yearly and the proportion dispensed a DMARD yearly (in those aged ≥66 for whom medication data were available). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the odds of remaining under rheumatologist care.
resultsThe cohort included 50,883 patients with RA (26.1% aged 66 years and older). Over half (57.7%) saw a rheumatologist yearly in all 5 years of follow-up. Sharp declines in the percentage of patients with an annual visit were observed in each subsequent year after diagnosis, although a linear trend to improved retention in rheumatology care was seen over the study period (P < 0.0001). For individuals aged 66 years or older (n = 13,293), 82.1% under rheumatologist care during all 5 years after diagnosis were dispensed a DMARD annually compared with 31.0% of those not retained under rheumatology care. Older age, male sex, lower socioeconomic status, higher comorbidity score, and having an older rheumatologist decreased the odds of remaining under rheumatology care.
conclusionSystem-level improvement initiatives should focus on maintaining ongoing access to rheumatology specialty care. Further investigation into causes of loss to rheumatology follow-up is needed.
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.