ArticleACR open rheumatology2023
Predictors and Interrelationship of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2023. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study assessed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in individuals with persistently positive antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) to better understand how living with aPL may affect their quality of life.
methodsPatients completed Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PF) and Cognitive Function (CF) Short Forms as well as the pain intensity (PI) rating (scale of 1-10). Patients were characterized for demographics, clinical manifestations of antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), cardiovascular risk factors, laboratory test results, and medication usage. Multivariate modeling was done via linear regression.
resultsOf 139 patients, 89 had primary APS, 21 had secondary APS, and 29 had persistent aPL without meeting clinical criteria for APS. The average T scores (±SD) for PF and CF were 45.4 ± 9.2 and 48.6 ± 11.6, respectively; the average for PI was 3.0 ± 2.6. Approximately half of the patients (47%) endorsed at least mild impairment in PF (T score < 45). Mean PF, CF, and PI did not differ between diagnostic groups. Individuals who endorsed more impairment on one measure also tended to endorse more impairment on another (Pearson r = 0.43-0.59). In the multivariate models, age, smoking, pain medications, and serotonergic medications were associated with impairment in at least one PRO domain. The Damage Index for APS was significantly correlated with both PF and CF.
conclusionIndividuals living with APS endorsed more impairment in PF (and potentially CF) than expected for the general population. The relationship between certain medications and PROs warrants further study, as does the longitudinal trajectory of these and other PROs.
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.