ArticleArthritis research & therapy2024
Performance of standardized patient reported outcomes developed for spondyloarthritis in primary and concomitant forms of fibromyalgia.
Article in Arthritis research & therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inflammation and pain as interconnected targets in axial spondyloarthritis.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2026Review
- Psychosocial dimensions of pain in axial spondyloarthritis: Construct validity and responsiveness of the multidimensional pain inventory (MPI).Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn spondyloarthritides (SpA) and fibromyalgia (FM), patients suffer from generalized pain. The impact of FM on PRO validated in SpA has not been systematically studied.
objectiveStudy the performance of PROs developed for SpA in patients with primary (p) FM without chronic inflammatory-rheumatic disease vs. SpA without and with concomitant (c) FM.
methodsPatients with pFM, axSpA or PsA and indication for treatment adaptation were prospectively included. Standardized PROs were assessed: BASDAI, ASDAS-CRP, DAPSA, patient´s global assessment, BASFI, LEI, MASES, SPARCC Enthesitis Score and FIQ.
results300 patients were included (100/diagnosis). More males were found in axSpA vs. PsA and pFM group (67, 33 and 2/100, respectively), while 12 axSpA (axSpA+) and 16 PsA (PsA+) patients had cFM. pFM patients showed significantly higher scores in all assessments vs. axSpA or PsA, with exception of ASDAS-CRP (3.3 ± 0.6 in FM vs. 3.1 ± 1.0 in axSpA) and duration of low lumbar morning stiffness. Similar results were also found in the subanalysis of female patients only. In addition, patients with axSpA + or PsA + showed no differences to patients with pFM, while significantly higher scores were found for FM, axSpA + and PsA + for almost all FIQ items compared to axSpA- or PsA-.
conclusionsPROs originally developed for axSpA or PsA need to be interpreted differently in the presence or absence of cFM. ASDAS-CRP and duration of lumbar morning stiffness were not affected by cFM. FM-specific questionnaires also showed high scores in patients with SpA with cFM but not in those without.
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.