ArticleNorthern clinics of Istanbul2026
Diagnosis and management practices in polymyalgia rheumatica among Turkish rheumatologists: An online cross-sectional survey.
Article in Northern clinics of Istanbul, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate real-world diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) among Turkish rheumatologists and compare them with international guideline recommendations.
methodsA cross-sectional online survey was conducted among rheumatologists practicing in Turkiye between September and October 2025. A self-administered 29-item questionnaire was distributed through professional communication networks. The survey was developed with reference to the 2012 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology (EULAR/ACR) classification criteria and international management guidelines. It assessed self-reported diagnostic approaches, screening practices for giant cell arteritis (GCA), treatment strategies, and follow-up and monitoring practices. Data were recorded and analyzed in a de-identified manner using descriptive statistics.
resultsA total of 101 rheumatologists participated in the survey. Diagnostic approaches varied substantially: use of the 2012 EULAR/ACR criteria was reported by 65 (64.4%), referral to the 2010 British Society for Rheumatology/British Health Professionals in Rheumatology (BSR/BHPR) guideline by 10 (9.9%), and primary reliance on clinical judgment by 76 (75.2%). Elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate and/or C-reactive protein (ESR/CRP) were considered necessary for diagnosis by 92 (91.1%). Use of imaging modalities, including ultrasonography (US), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and positron emission tomography (PET), was highly heterogeneous, and routine screening for giant cell arteritis (GCA) was reported by 25 (24.8%). Glucocorticoid (GC) monotherapy was the preferred first-line treatment among 76 participants (75.2%), with most clinicians selecting guideline-recommended starting doses (12.5-25 mg/day) and initiating tapering between weeks 4 and 8. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) were most commonly introduced at first relapse (55, 54.5%). Although osteoporosis risk assessment was reported by 86 (85.1%), the use of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX), and referral for exercise programs remained inconsistent.
conclusionAlthough initial GC therapy was generally consistent with guideline recommendations, considerable heterogeneity was observed in diagnostic approaches, imaging use, screening for GCA, and long-term monitoring practices, indicating persistent gaps between guidelines and real-world clinical practice.
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.