ArticleEULAR rheumatology open2026
Methodology of the development of the EULAR Antiphospholipid Syndrome Disease Activity Score (EAPSDAS).
Article in EULAR rheumatology 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To describe the methodology of the development of a EULAR disease activity score in antiphospholipid syndrome (EAPSDAS). Methods: In phase I/item generation, we used a systematic literature review (SLR) and 2 open-ended surveys among Task Force members, experts in antiphospholipid syndrome (APS)/collaborators, patients with primary APS, and health professionals in rheumatology (HPRs). In phase II/item reduction, similar items were eliminated, participants rated items on their importance to be included in EAPSDAS, and the Delphi methodology/voting was used. In phase III/Item scoring, we used real-world clinical vignettes to develop scores for included items. We applied linear regression analysis with physician global assessment (PhysGA) as the standard. Results: SLR retrieved 3834 articles; 47 were analyzed. Of 170 items generated from the SLR and initial surveys, 140 deduplicated candidate items were rated by 74 physicians, 65 patients, and 21 HPRs and voted on by Task Force members. Twenty-four items were included in the EAPSDAS thrombotic/microvascular/nonthrombotic (TMN) scale, and 6 in the obstetric scale. Three versions of 60 real-world clinical vignettes were randomly assigned to participating physicians, split into 3 groups. The items' score was calculated as the mean PhysGA adjusted for physician characteristics. Pairwise ranking comparisons analysis supported the mean vignette rankings. Analysis of ratings of the combinations of single manifestations showed no significant enhancement in scores except for 6 of 26 combinations of manifestations, supporting a 'bump-up' in these scores. TMN manifestations that should be scored if they remained stable or improved were determined by a survey. Conclusions: EAPSDAS was developed using data-driven and consensus methodology.
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.