ArticleRMD open2026
Study on the implementation of the 2015 EULAR/ACR recommendations for polymyalgia rheumatica in clinical practice.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo study the implementation of the 2015 European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) management recommendations for polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) among rheumatologists and general practitioners (GPs).
methodsAn online survey (Survey Monkey) comprising 28 questions was distributed among members of the EULAR Study Group on PMR and giant cell arteritis (n=375). Each member was asked to invite at least one GP (snowball principle) with experience in PMR to participate. Statistical analysis included descriptive statistics; differences were tested using Fisher's exact test.
resultsThere were 308 respondents from 37 countries including data from 211 rheumatologists and 73 GPs. Adherence to the 2015 EULAR/ACR recommendations was higher among rheumatologists (83%) than GPs (35%). Rheumatologists (96%) prescribed glucocorticoids more frequently at dosages within the recommended range than GPs (84%). Concerning tapering, a similar proportion of rheumatologists (83%) and GPs (72%) reached the suggested 10 mg prednisone equivalent after 4-8 weeks. Almost all rheumatologists used methotrexate as a glucocorticoid-sparing agent (95%) as compared with only 26% of GPs. Similarly, 70% of rheumatologists, but only 2% of GPs, had experience with interleukin-6 receptor inhibitors for PMR. For follow-up, more rheumatologists preferred scheduled (as opposed to on demand) visits than GPs (99% vs 82%), while more GPs than rheumatologists (47% vs 31%) planned a short follow-up interval (4-8 weeks) in the first year of disease.
conclusionImplementation of the EULAR/ACR recommendation for the management of PMR remains incomplete, particularly among GPs. Future updates should incorporate projects to foster diffusion and implementation of the recommendations among all professionals managing this disease.
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.