ReviewJournal of rheumatic diseases2026
Defining early axial spondyloarthritis: insights and applications of the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society international consensus.
Review in Journal of rheumatic diseases, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is a chronic inflammatory disease with variable clinical presentation and often delayed diagnosis. The Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society (ASAS) recently proposed a consensus definition of early axSpA to standardize research and improve comparability across studies. This review outlines the rationale and methodology of the ASAS-SPEAR (SPondyloarthritis EARly) initiative and discusses its implications for clinical research. Despite its promise, recent studies applying the definition have shown that treatment outcomes in early axSpA, defined as ≤2 years of symptom duration, do not consistently differ from established disease. Methodological limitations and heterogeneous criteria in earlier literature underscore the need for refined, evidence-based definitions. Future prospective trials using the ASAS criteria and stratified by symptom duration and clinical features are needed to clarify the value of early intervention and its potential impact on disease progression. The ASAS definition offers a valuable research framework, though its application in clinical practice awaits further validation.
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.