ArticleBMC rheumatology2024
Survey self-report of rheumatoid arthritis and treatments versus specialist clinician confirmation.
Article in BMC rheumatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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
Abstract
objectiveTo assess agreement between patient survey report and physician recorded arthritic conditions and medication use in order to validate population-based epidemiologic approaches to auto-immune arthritic conditions.
methodsRheumatologists in the U.S. Appalachian region recruited men 50 years or older with a confirmed rheumatoid arthritis (RA) diagnosis. For each participating patient, the treating specialist completed a brief chart abstraction that included rheumatic diagnosis and corresponding treatment. Patients participated in a telephone interview using the same questionnaire as applied in a larger random digit dial survey that queried arthritis diagnosis and treatment. We assessed patient-clinician agreement with the Prevalence Adjusted and Biased Adjusted Kappa (PABAK) statistic.
resultsWe included 36 patient-clinician dyads in this analysis. All clinicians and patients concurred in the RA diagnosis (PABAK = 1). For concomitant systemic lupus and scleroderma, we observed generally concordant responses (PABAK 0.89 and 1, respectively). For medication use, for hydroxychloroquine or sulfasalazine was associated with the lowest PABAK (0.39), intermediate values for methotrexate and for the "other conventional synthetic DMARDs" category (0.67), and with the highest agreement PABAK value for the "biologic DMARD or JAK 2 inhibitor" category (0.89).
conclusionSurvey-based self-report of RA offers a useful approach in epidemiological investigation. This is particularly relevant to population-based approaches to autoimmune arthritis related to occupational and environmental factors.
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.