ReviewRheumatology international2025
Low adherence to cardiovascular risk assessment guidelines in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a retrospective chart review of routine clinical practice.
Review in Rheumatology international, 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.
- Ten-year incidence and heart failure dominance of hospitalized cardiovascular events in rheumatoid arthritis: a hospital-based cohort study from Martinique.Rheumatology international · 2026Article
- The joint-local renin-angiotensin system in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis: mechanistic evidence, disease-specific patterns, and translational perspectives.Rheumatology international · 2026Review
- Global prevalence of metabolic syndrome in patients with Rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC rheumatology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPatients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have an elevated risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Despite European guidelines recommending routine CVD risk assessment, implementation in clinical practice is challenging. The objectives of this review were to determine if patients attending an Irish tertiary rheumatology centre received CVD risk assessments in line with European guidelines and assess the extent of CVD risk factor screening over five years of routine rheumatology care.
methodsA retrospective chart review was conducted for patients newly diagnosed with RA in 2018, with five-year follow-up. Data were extracted to determine if CVD risk assessments were performed, and where absent, risk was retrospectively calculated. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement checklist for cohort studies was used to guide the reporting of this study.
resultsAmong 21 patients, no documented CVD risk assessments were identified. CVD risk factor screening was consistently insufficient. There was a lack of documented clinical data necessary to conduct a CVD risk assessment on more than half of patients at study entry, and one quarter of patients at five-year follow up. Of those with data available (n = 10), retrospective calculations showed 80% had an undetected moderate or higher CVD risk at diagnosis. There was no documented referral to primary care for CVD risk assessment.
conclusionImplementation of CVD risk management guidelines in the routine care of patients with RA is challenging. The interpretation and operationalisation of guideline recommendations by rheumatology healthcare professionals in relation to implementation barriers needs to be explored.
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.