ArticleRheumatology advances in practice2025
External validation of the polymyalgia rheumatica impact scale: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Rheumatology advances in practice, 2025. 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.
- Modern Management of Isolated Polymyalgia Rheumatica.Rheumatology and therapy · 2025Review
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
Objectives: To externally validate the PMR impact scale (PMR-IS). Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study at the University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. Recently diagnosed PMR patients were included between July 2022 and December 2023 and followed until 1 year after diagnosis. All patients completed the PMR-IS, HAQ Disability Index, 36-item Short Form and a visual analogue scale for pain at every visit. Internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects, construct validity, responsiveness and discriminatory power for detecting relapse on the PMR-IS were assessed. Results: Fifty-five PMR patients (mean age 71 years, 47% female) were included, who had a total of 246 visits. Internal consistency, construct validity and responsiveness met the quality criteria for the symptoms, function and emotional and psychological well-being subdomains. The internal consistency of the glucocorticoid side effects subdomain was insufficient and only one of the three hypotheses for construct validity were met. The function and emotional and psychological well-being subdomains showed a floor effect, while no ceiling effect was observed. The symptoms, function and emotional and psychological well-being subdomains had a good discriminatory power for detecting relapse [area under the curve (AUC) 0.89, 0.86 and 0.72, respectively], but the PMR activity score performed better (AUC 0.94, Conclusion: This study validates the good measurement properties of the symptoms, function and emotional and psychological well-being subdomains of the PMR-IS. In contrast, the glucocorticoid side effects subdomain did not show adequate internal consistency and construct validity, necessitating further validation and possibly refinement of its items prior to application in clinical trials or daily practice.
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.