ArticleRheumatology international2026
Longitudinal fatigue outcomes and prediction in inflammatory arthritis: a real-world digital cohort study.
Article in Rheumatology international, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fatigue is a burdensome symptom in inflammatory arthritis (IA), yet meaningful longitudinal change remains poorly characterized in real-world settings. To characterize fatigue trajectories, quantify clinically meaningful improvement/worsening, and identify baseline predictors of fatigue outcomes in a digital IA cohort. We analyzed Midaia digital application data from patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, or mixed IA with baseline Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) data. Fatigue trajectories were modelled via cluster-robust longitudinal regression, with secondary landmark analyses classifying BFI improvement/worsening using a prespecified pragmatic 1.0-point BFI change threshold at weeks 12 (W12), 24 (W24), and 52 (W52). Predictors were examined using logistic regression, machine learning with area under the curve (AUC) and model interpretation, and inverse probability weighting (IPW) for loss to follow-up. The cohort (2,660 patients; 3,436 valid BFI observations; 485 with follow-up) was 78.3% female, mean age 45.6 ± 12.9 years, baseline BFI 5.2 ± 2.0. The unadjusted BFI slope was - 0.017 points/week (95% CI - 0.025 to - 0.008; p < 0.001; corresponding to - 0.20 points by W12, below the MCID); the IPW-adjusted slope was attenuated to - 0.003 points/week, suggesting that the crude estimate was sensitive to differential follow-up. At W12, 26.8% improved and 25.6% worsened, with similar proportions at W24 and W52. Higher baseline BFI predicted W12 improvement (OR 1.54) and lower worsening (OR 0.62); higher baseline Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity predicted worsening (OR 1.02). Machine-learning discrimination was modest (AUC 0.651-0.720). Diet/nutrition engagement was associated with higher improvement (OR 1.78) and lower worsening (OR 0.45). Fatigue trajectories in IA were heterogeneous. Landmark improvement/worsening proportions were unchanged after IPW, whereas mean improvement was attenuated. Baseline fatigue severity dominated prediction; action-plan associations are hypothesis-generating.
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.