ArticleRMD open2026
Refining serological scores in rheumatoid arthritis classification: an international study.
Article in RMD open, 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
34 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the American College of Rheumatology/European Alliance of Rheumatology Associations 2010 classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-citrullinated protein/peptide antibodies (ACPA) are assigned the same weight, although ACPA have proven more specific than RF. We aimed to refine the serological weight factors for RA classification. MATERIALS AND
methodsDiagnostic samples from 398 patients with RA and 448 diseased controls (DC) were evaluated with RF and ACPA assays from five different manufacturers. A grid search was conducted across all possible integer score pairs for RF and ACPA to identify the weighting combination that optimised the specificity of RA classification. This combination was applied in a refined scoring system (RSS) for three confirmatory cohorts comprising, respectively, 67, 157 and 132 patients with RA and 441, 153 and 193 DC.
findingsIn the investigative cohort, the optimal combination of weighting scores was characterised by higher scores for ACPA, higher antibody levels and double RF/ACPA positivity.Applying the optimal combination of weighting scores decreased misclassification compared with the 2010 RA classification criteria, minimally affecting sensitivity. For seropositive patients, RSS significantly lowered misclassification from 38.3-55.8% to 15.0-26.9%.The improved specificity of RSS (compared with the 2010 criteria) was validated in the confirmatory cohorts. Considering only seropositive patients, the RSS significantly decreased RA misclassification (8.6-36.8% vs 20.0-78.9%), minimally affecting the sensitivity (86.7-97.3% vs 86.7-96.0%).
interpretationSerological weight factors for RA classification can be improved by taking into account the antibody type, the antibody levels and single or combined positivity. The application of an RSS reduced the number of RA misclassifications.
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.