ArticleACR open rheumatology2025
Racial Implicit Bias, Treatment Recommendations, and Perceived Compliance in the Care of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis.
Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveRacial implicit bias may contribute to health disparities in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) outcomes by impacting provider medical decision-making. Our study assessed racial and racial-medical compliance implicit biases of an international pediatric rheumatology community and investigated whether their biases impact treatment recommendations for patients with JIA.
methodsA web-based survey, which included a randomized vignette describing either a White or Black patient with JIA, was sent to pediatric rheumatology providers. Participants were prompted to select the best patient management option and to complete two implicit association tests (IATs): race and race compliance. Student's t-tests or analysis of variance were used to compare IAT D-scores between or across groups; all tests were two-sided with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Logistic regression models were used to examine associations for two outcomes of interest: recommendation of either adequate (methotrexate monotherapy) or aggressive (methotrexate and adalimumab combination) treatment with each IAT D-score by each vignette.
resultsOverall, 165 pediatric rheumatologists completed the survey. Providers showed a slight pro-White bias in the race IAT (mean D-score ± SD 0.26 ± 0.5) and race-medical compliance IAT (mean D-score ± SD 0.16 ± 0.43). Although not statistically significant, a one-point increase in IAT D-scores was associated with a lower likelihood that providers would choose aggressive treatment versus adequate treatment in the Black vignette (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20-1.47; P = 0.23), and a greater likelihood that providers would choose aggressive treatment in the White vignette (OR 4.07, 95% CI 0.74-22.24; P = 0.11).
conclusionImplicit bias was not associated with treatment recommendations. Further studies are needed to better evaluate the impact of implicit bias.
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.