Trial reportLupus science & medicine2025
Advancing treat-to-target in SLE: a pilot study using a clinical decision support system.
Trial report in Lupus science & medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus: Biologicals, small-molecular agents, and cell-depleting therapies coming to the clinic.Journal of internal medicine · 2026Review
- Navigating the gap: the challenge of applying treat-to-target in routine lupus care-a national perspective.Lupus science & medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the feasibility, usability and acceptability of implementing a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy supported by a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS), in routine SLE outpatient care.
methodsA 24-week, non-randomised, multicentre, clustered pilot study was conducted across four rheumatology outpatient centres. Adult patients with SLE were allocated by centre to either a T2T strategy supported by a CDSS (T2T-CDSS) or a routine outpatient care (ROC) group. The CDSS provided evidence-based treatment recommendations based on disease activity measures. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment and retention rates. Usability was assessed with the System Usability Scale (SUS), completed by physicians in the T2T-CDSS group. Acceptability was evaluated using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (TSQ) and qualitative feedback. Exploratory outcomes included disease activity, remission rates and treatment modifications.
resultsOf 91 screened patients, 38 were enrolled (recruitment rate 42%) and 35 completed the study (retention rate 92%). The SUS score for the CDSS was 73.8, indicating good usability. Global satisfaction scores on the TSQ were stable over time and comparable between groups. Remission was achieved at least once by 61% (11/18) of patients in the T2T-CDSS group and 59% (10/17) in the ROC group. Both treatment intensifications and de-escalations occurred more frequently in the T2T-CDSS group compared with ROC (83% vs 47%). Treatment intensifications were observed in 61% of patients in the T2T-CDSS group vs 29% in the ROC group. Treatment de-escalation, represented by glucocorticoid tapering, occurred in 39% of T2T-CDSS patients compared with 18% in ROC. No statistically significant differences were observed between groups in disease activity outcomes or remission rates.
conclusionsImplementation of a T2T strategy supported by a CDSS in SLE outpatient care was feasible, usable and acceptable to patients and physicians. Although qualitative feedback revealed important implementation barriers that should be addressed in future trials, the intervention facilitated proactive, target-driven treatment adjustments without compromising patient satisfaction and shows promise for implementing goal-directed therapy in SLE management.
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.