ArticleACR open rheumatology2025
How and Who? Examining Real-World Evidence of Engagement and Use of an Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Smartphone Application in Routine Clinical Care for Patients With Inflammatory Arthritides.
Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital monitoring in rheumatoid arthritis: remote assessment, wearables, and data-driven disease management.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2026Review
- Characterizing Adherence to a Mobile Health App for Patient-Reported Outcomes in Rheumatoid Arthritis.Rheumatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Physicians' Use of Electronic Health Record Data Elements and Decision Support Tools in Heart Failure Management: User-Centered Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR cardio · 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
objectiveWe evaluate the use of an app to remotely collect electronic patient-reported outcomes (ePROs) in patients attending routine rheumatology clinics with inflammatory arthritis (IA) over a four year period.
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of real-world data obtained from patients with IA who attended routine appointments between 2018 and 2022. Patients used an app to track their disease course by using Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID3), Health Assessment Questionnaire - Disability Index, or self-assessing tender and swollen joint counts. Elapsed days of the app use, number, and time between ePROs reports were analyzed using Poisson and Tobit regression models. Results were stratified by gender, age, diagnosis, baseline disease severity, and disability.
resultsAt least one ePRO report was provided by 673 patients. Mean age was 53.7 ± 13.9 years; 458 (68%) were female. RAPID3 was reported by 613 (91%) patients, 531 (79%) provided more than one RAPID3, and 82 (12%) provided one RAPID3; there was no difference between groups stratified by gender, age, IA type, and baseline arthritis severity. Median engagement was 14.8 months (interquartile range 12.8-17). The proportion of enrolled patients completing a RAPID3 every month reduced from 91% at baseline to 38% at 6 months, and 24% at month 12. Older patients (60-69 years old) were more likely to be long-term users than those aged less than 50 years old (P < 0.006). Patients aged over 60 provided more reports than younger users (P < 0.0001). Gender, baseline arthritis activity, and disability level were not associated with the length or frequency of app use.
conclusionThis analysis offers insights into engagement and long-term sustainability of remote ePRO collection in a real-world rheumatology setting.
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.