Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38355831›Full record

ArticleClinical rheumatology2024

Development of a novel clinimetric tool: PAtient Reported Disease Activity Index in Rheumatoid Arthritis (PARDAI-RA) by PANLAR, for the assessment of patients living with rheumatoid arthritis.

Daniel G Fernández-Ávila, Daniela Patiño-Hernández, Socorro Moreno-Luna, Lorena Brance, Álvaro Arbeláez, Antonio Cachafeiro Vilar, Carlos Lozada, Carlos Ríos, Carlos Toro, Claudia Ramírez and 10 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 97% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors at 14 institutions in 10 countries.

Daniel G Fernández-ÁvilaRheumatology Division, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana - Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Bogotá, Colombia. daniel.fernandez@javeriana.edu.co.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1490-1822
Daniela Patiño-HernándezInternal Medicina Department, Hospital Universitario San Ignacio, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9148-1289
Socorro Moreno-LunaEpidemiology Department, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4119-4409
Lorena BranceRheumatology Division, Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Santa Fe, Argentina.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6526-6278
Álvaro ArbeláezClínica Imbanaco, Cali, Colombia.
Antonio Cachafeiro VilarPacífica Salud, Panamá, Panama.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8219-6814
Carlos LozadaRheumatology Division, University of Miami, Coral Gables, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7340-7264
Carlos RíosUniversidad de Especialidades Espíritu Santo, Guayaquil, Ecuador.
Carlos ToroCentro de Referencia en Osteoporosis y Reumatología, Cali, Colombia.
Claudia RamírezRheumatology Division Keralty, Bogotá, Colombia.
Guillermo Pons-EstelCentro Regional de Enfermedades Autoinmunes y Reumáticas (GO-CREAR), Rosario, Argentina.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0647-929X
Manuel Ugarte-GilUniversidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Peru.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1728-1999
María NarváezRheumatology Division Keralty, Bogotá, Colombia.
Miguel AlbaneseCentro de Asistencia del CASMU, Montevideo, Uruguay.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4959-4738
Orlando RoaRheumatology Division Keralty, Bogotá, Colombia.
Oscar RuizRheumatology Division Keralty, Bogotá, Colombia.
Paula BurgosClinic Immunology and Rheumatology Department, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago de Chile, Chile.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1526-0126
Ricardo XavierRheumatology Service Hospital de Clinicas de Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Yurilis FuentesUniversidad de Oriente, Cumaná, Venezuela.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5915-769X
Enrique SorianoRheumatology Division, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3143-1084
Pontificia Universidad Javeriana · COCentro Uruguayo de Imagenología Molecular · UYFundacion Instituto de Reumatologia Fernando Chalem · COHospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre · BRHospital Italiano de Buenos Aires · ARHospital Provincial de Rosario · ARHospital Punta Pacifica · PAHospital Universitario San Ignacio · CONational University of Rosario · ARPontificia Universidad Católica de Chile · CLUniversidad Científica del Sur · PEUniversidad de Especialidades Espíritu Santo · ECUniversidad de Oriente · VEUniversity of Miami · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical experience has shown that a single measure is not sufficient to assess disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Various clinimetric tools are necessary to address the many clinical situations that can arise.

methodsIn order to develop a comprehensive measurement tool, the Pan American League of Associations for Rheumatology searched for the most frequent measures of disease activity applied in RA by means of a semi-systematic review of the available literature.

resultsWe found that the most frequently reported measures of disease activity were the 28-joint Disease Activity Score, C-reactive protein, and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate, followed by patient-reported measures of pain and stiffness and many other composite indices and patient-reported outcome measures. The most frequent physician-reported sign of disease was the swollen joint count, and the most frequently self-reported feature was the increase in disease activity or flares.

conclusionIn this article, we present a new clinimetric tool developed based on expert consensus and on data retrieved from our search. Disease activity can be better assessed by combining various data sources, such as clinical, laboratory, and self-reported outcomes. These variables were included in our novel clinimetric tool. Key Points • The goal of treatment of RA is to achieve the best possible control of inflammation, or even remission; therefore, disease management should include systematic and regular evaluation of inflammation and health status. • Clinimetric tools evaluate a series of variables (e.g., symptoms, functional capacity, disease severity, quality of life, disease progression) and can reveal substantial prognostic and therapeutic differences between patients. • Our clinimetric tool, which is based on a combination of data (e.g., clinical variables, laboratory results, PROMs), can play a relevant role in patient assessment and care.

Indexed as

Antirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidHumansInflammationPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeSeverity of Illness IndexAntirheumatic AgentsAssessmentClinimetricsManagementPatient-reported outcome measuresRheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

PMID38355831
PMCPMC10944809
OpenAlexW4391806254

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.