ArticleAdvances in rheumatology (London, England)2024
Challenges in implementing treat-to-target in rheumatoid arthritis: a perspective from Brazilian rheumatologists.
Article in Advances in rheumatology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Therapeutic efficacy of celastrol in experimental polyarthritis: insights from a meta-analysis of in vivo studies.Inflammopharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Navigating the gap: the challenge of applying treat-to-target in routine lupus care-a national perspective.Lupus science & medicine · 2026Article
- Frontiers in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Emerging Research and Unmet Needs in Pharmacologic Management.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Disease Activity Assessment Frequency in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Retrospective Observational Study of the Medical Support System for Rheumatoid Arthritis System Implementation.JMIR formative research · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient management in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has evolved to a "treat-to-target" (T2T) approach, which entails intensive treatment and regular follow-up with the goal of achieving low levels of disease activity or clinical remission. Even though a T2T approach is endorsed by professional organizations and yields superior outcomes, its implementation remains incomplete. EVEREST (EleVatE care in RhEumatoid arthritiS with Treat-to-target) is a quality-improvement initiative designed to improve the widespread implementation of a personalized T2T strategy and enable patients with RA to reach their full potential for remission. We describe the Brazilian results from the Global T2T Survey, first part of the EVEREST program.
methodsBetween June and September 2022, we conducted an online survey targeting rheumatologists in Brazil. Our objective was to evaluate the barriers and knowledge gaps hindering the effective implementation of T2T strategies. To achieve this, we employed a set of multiple-choice questions specifically crafted to elicit responses categorized in a structured order.
results166 rheumatologists participated in the survey, 51% of them with more than 21 years of experience in rheumatology. Regarding the perceived challenges in the management of RA in clinical practice, the highest percentage of agreement/strong agreement among the participants was related to the contradictory results of disease activity measures (60%). In terms of the main barriers to assess the disease activity in clinical practice, the lack of adherence to treatment and contradictory assessments between patient-reported outcomes and composite measures were indicated by 75% and 59% of the participants, respectively, as a moderate/serious barrier. The most frequently knowledge and skill gaps related to the management of RA pointed out by the participants were on the difficulty to assess patients' health literacy (54% stated to have no more than intermediate knowledge on standardized methods to assess it and 43% no more than intermediate skills on determining the level of health literacy of the patients). In general, the use of tools to support the management of RA patients in clinical practice was indicated to be unusual by the participants. Self-reflection questionnaires, patient education materials and treatment consideration checklists were pointed out as the least frequently used tools (85%, 64% and 62% of the participants stated to use them never, rarely, or only sometimes, respectively).
conclusionsOur findings indicate a greater need for design, selection, and uptake of practical strategies to further improve communication between healthcare providers and patients with RA, as well as for promoting well-informed, collaborative decision-making in their care.
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.