ReviewAdvances in rheumatology (London, England)2025
Juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies assessment by magnetic resonance imaging: a scoping review of protocols, scoring systems, and applications.
Review in Advances in rheumatology (London, England), 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
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOur review assessed whole body (WB) and dedicated body-part magnetic resonance imaging (DedMRI) techniques, protocols, and inflammatory scoring systems, focusing on their clinimetric properties (reliability, validity, responsiveness) in clinical and research settings of patients with juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (JIIM).
methodsA comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from 2000 to 2024 identified relevant studies.
resultsSixteen studies enrolling JIIM patients with MRI were reviewed, which showed heterogeneity in objectives, methodologies, and scoring systems. Four (25%) studies used quantitative assessments, while 12 (75%) employed semi-quantitative or qualitative methods in scoring MRI. WB-MRI was performed in 3 (18.7%) studies, and DedMRI in 13 (81.2%). Muscle evaluation included assessments of edema [14 (87.5%) studies], fatty infiltration [4 (25%) studies], and atrophy [6 (37.5%) studies]. T1 images were used in 9 (56.2%) studies for measuring chronic changes, with coronal views reported in 6 (37.5%). Fluid-sensitive sequences (T2 with fat saturation, STIR) were employed in all studies and were obtained in the coronal plane in 9 (56.2%). These sequences were crucial for detecting soft tissue edema related to acute/subacute inflammation. One (6%) study included diffusion and T1 post-contrast sequences.
conclusionThere is significant heterogeneity in MRI protocols for evaluating JIIM. Standardized WB-MRI protocols are needed to ensure consistency and comparability across studies and institutions, optimize assessments of disease activity, treatment response, and follow-up in JIIM patients. Standardization should enhance the reliability of MRI for diagnosing and monitoring JIIM in clinical and research settings.
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.