ReviewClinical rheumatology2026
Gout: a practical approach to diagnosis and management in low- and middle-income countries and resource-limited settings.
Review in Clinical rheumatology, 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.
- Gout: a practical approach to diagnosis and management in low- and middle-income countries and resource-limited settings.Clinical rheumatology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prevalence of gout is increasing worldwide, with rapid rises reported in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), particularly in parts of Asia, Latin America, and Africa. Several international organizations have published guidelines for optimal gout management, most of which are from developed countries with high-income settings. Therefore, implementing these recommendations in LMICs and other resource-limited settings (RLS) is often difficult due to several barriers. These include a shortage of rheumatologists and other relevant specialists, workforce constraints, limited access to advanced diagnostic modalities (e.g., compensated polarized light microscopy, ultrasound, and dual-energy computed tomography), restricted availability and affordability of newer effective therapies, as well as limited access to HLA-B*58:01 testing before initiating allopurinol in at-risk populations. As a result, gout care in these settings may be suboptimal. This review summarizes these barriers and proposes pragmatic, context-appropriate strategies to address them. It emphasizes targeted education and the development of multidisciplinary gout care teams, including primary care physicians, nurses, and pharmacists, who deliver most gout care in LMICs/RLS. It also outlines structured collaboration with higher-level facilities (e.g., through teleconsultation and case conferences) to support difficult cases and strengthen referral pathways. National rheumatology societies and health authorities should adapt international guidelines to local constraints and establish reimbursement or authorization pathways for high-cost urate lowering therapy not included in essential drug lists. In addition, trained community health workers can support gout care by identifying people with gout, providing basic education, promoting regular follow-up, facilitating access to appropriate care, and correcting misconceptions about gout. Key Points • LMIC/RLS gout care is limited by diagnostic capacity and management constraints, especially workforce shortages. • Collaboration among higher-level facilities, rheumatology societies, and health authorities is key to improving gout management. • International guidelines should be adapted to local constraints in LMICs/RLS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42449017What 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.