ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2023
Continuing specialist care into adulthood in young people with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records in England.
Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Opinions on contributing data to research studies: survey results from adults living with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Holistic management of juvenile idiopathic arthritis across all ages: British Society for Rheumatology Guideline scope.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2026Review
- Biologic and targeted synthetic DMARD safety in inflammatory arthritis: British Society for Rheumatology guideline scope.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2025Review
- Pain management in people with inflammatory arthritis: British Society for Rheumatology guideline scope.Rheumatology advances in practice · 2024Review
- Physical Activity Influences Health-Related Quality of Life in Adults with Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to measure (1) the proportion of children who continue to receive specialist care (rheumatology/ophthalmology) as adults, (2) the characteristics associated with continuing specialist care, and (3) the frequency of specialist care appointments in both paediatric and adult services.
methodsA retrospective cohort of young people with JIA was identified from UK primary care electronic health records (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) between 1 April 2003 and 31 December 2018. To be included in the study, cases needed to have at least 1 year of registration at their general practice beyond age 18 and linkage to Hospital Episodes Statistics data for secondary care information. All specialist care outpatient visits were identified from Hospital Episodes Statistics outpatient data.
resultsThere were 666 young people included in the study. Of these, 427 (64%) received specialist care beyond age 18, 90 (13%) had their last recorded contact at 16-17 years and 149 (22%) did not continue after 16 years. Older age at diagnosis, female gender, less deprivation and a childhood diagnosis of uveitis were associated with continuing specialist care beyond age 18. Of those continuing beyond 18, 35% (n = 153) were subsequently discharged by the study end date. Of all those discharged, 32% had a missed appointment recorded after the last attended visit, suggesting failure to attend.
conclusionsTwo-thirds of young people with JIA continue to receive specialist care beyond age 18. This is useful information for children and young people with JIA and their families planning for their future, and for clinicians planning health-care services.
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.