ReviewRMD open2024
On difficulties to define prognostic factors for clinical practice in rheumatoid arthritis.
Review in RMD open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative effectiveness and safety of tofacitinib vs. adalimumab in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Individualised treatment effect prediction: the benefit of initial biological treatment in early rheumatoid arthritis.EULAR rheumatology open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the identification of prognostic factors (PF) capable of predicting disease outcome, response to treatment or success of dose reduction is an important issue, as these factors are intended to serve as a basis for decision-making. The task is complex from the outset, as the definition of disease prognosis or therapeutic prognosis is not uniquevocal. The heterogeneity of the definitions used partly explains the failure to identify PF that can be applied at an individual level. But other factors also contribute. First, the scope of the disease studied is too broad, including nosologically different entities. Second, potential PF are only measured at a single point of time, whereas changes over a period of time should be taken into account to a greater extent, not forgetting the potential impact of the treatment received during this period. Beyond these limiting factors, one of the main obstacles to the identification of PF is probably the fact that the phase of the disease is not sufficiently taken into account. Predicting the disease outcome when it is well established is a more complex challenge than when it is just beginning, as many factors are likely to interfere. The same applies to therapeutic PF, which should be determined according to disease duration. Difficulties also arise from the approaches used, which are often restricted to a single field of interest whereas they should be much more integrative and call on new large-scale data analysis tools with a view to precision medicine.In RA, prognosis can be defined at two levels: disease outcome, including joint damage and risk of extra-articular manifestations and/or complications, and treatment outcome, including response to therapy, risk of adverse effects and drug-free remission.
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.