ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2024
Validation of a patient-reported outcome measure for giant cell arteritis.
Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-reported outcomes and disease activity in giant cell arteritis: a longitudinal registry-based study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Measurement of the impact of giant cell arteritis and treatment with glucocorticoids on health-related quality of life.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2026Review
- Comparison of the Catquest-9SF and Cat-PROM5 Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Literature Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Patient-reported outcomes in large vessel vasculitis: insights from a retrospective analysis of disease activity and associated factors.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Article
- The DANIsh VASculitis cohort study: protocol for a national multicenter prospective study including incident and prevalent patients with giant cell arteritis and polymyalgia rheumatica.Frontiers in medicine · 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
11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesGCA is systemic vasculitis manifesting as cranial, ocular or large vessel vasculitis. A prior qualitative study developed 40 candidate items to assess the impact of GCA on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to determine final scale structure and measurement properties of the GCA patient reported outcome (GCA-PRO) measure.
methodsCross-sectional study included UK patients with clinician-confirmed GCA. They completed 40 candidate items for the GCA-PRO at times 1 and 2 (3 days apart), EQ-5D-5L, ICECAP-A, CAT-PROM5 and self-report of disease activity. Rasch and exploratory factor analyses informed item reduction and established structural validity, reliability and unidimensionality of the final GCA-PRO. Evidence of validity was also established with hypothesis testing (GCA-PRO vs other PRO scores, and between participants with 'active disease' vs those 'in remission') and test-retest reliability.
resultsThe study population consisted of 428 patients: mean (s.d.) age 74.2 (7.2), 285 (67%) female; 327 (76%) cranial GCA, 114 (26.6%) large vessel vasculitis and 142 (33.2%) ocular involvement. Rasch analysis eliminated 10 candidate GCA items and informed restructuring of response categories into four-point Likert scales. Factor analysis confirmed four domains: acute symptoms (eight items), activities of daily living (seven items), psychological (seven items) and participation (eight items). The overall scale had adequate Rasch model fit (χ2 = 25.219, degrees of freedom = 24, P = 0.394). Convergent validity with EQ5D-5L, ICECAP-A and Cat-PROM5 was confirmed through hypothesis testing. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were excellent.
conclusionThe final GCA-PRO is a 30-item, four-domain scale with robust evidence of validity and reliability in measuring HRQoL in people with GCA.
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.