The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What is the most appropriate radiologic scoring method for ankylosing spondylitis?: A comparison of the available methods based on the outcome measures in rheumatology clinical trials filter
Abstract
Objective: To select the most appropriate radiologic scoring method for the evaluation of radiographic progression in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) in clinical trials. Methods: The validity of the currently available methods, the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Radiology Index (BASRI), the Stoke Ankylosing Spondylitis Spine Score (SASSS), and the modified SASSS (M‐SASSS), was tested according to the aspects of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials filter: truth, discrimination (reliability and sensitivity to change), and feasibility, using radiographs of 133 patients at 4 different time points (baseline, 1 year, 2 years, and 4 years). One observer scored these sets in chronological order. To assess interobserver reliability, a second observer scored radiographs of 20 patients at the 4 different time points. Results: After 4 years, 9% and 8% of patients showed changes >0 in the sacroiliac (SI) joints and hips, respectively. Independent of the method chosen, ∼40% of patients showed changes in both the lumbar and cervical spine. Therefore, it was concluded that, for the assessment of progression, SI joints and hips are of minor importance. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) varied from 0.87 to 0.98 and ICCs for intraobserver scores varied from 0.96 to 0.99. Concerning progression scores, only the ICC for the M‐SASSS measured after 2 years remained acceptable (0.82). The intraobserver scores for progression after 2 years of followup were an ICC of 0.93 for the BASRI, an ICC of 0.79 for the SASSS, and an ICC of 0.95 for the M‐SASSS. Concerning sensitivity to change, it was found that the M‐SASSS classified the highest percentage of patients with a change >0. Conclusion: The M‐SASSS is the most appropriate method by which to score the radiographic progression in AS patients in clinical trials.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Călin, A., Garrett, S., Whitelock, H., Kennedy, L. G., O'Hea, J., MALLORIE, P. A., & Jenkinson, T. (1994) · PubMed · Cited by 1,834
(2001) · Classic Papers in Rheumatology · doi:10.3109/9780203214237-70 · Cited by 1,833
The OMERACT filter for Outcome Measures in Rheumatology.
Boers, M., Brooks, P., STRAND, C. V., & Tugwell, P. (1998) · PubMed · Cited by 630
The outcome of ankylosing spondylitis: a study of 100 patients.
Gran, J. T., & Skomsvoll, J. F. (1997) · Rheumatology · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/36.7.766 · Cited by 276
van der Heijde, D. M. F. M., Bellamy, N., Călin, A., Dougados, M., Ma, K., & van der Linden, S. (1997) · PubMed · Cited by 240
Self-citationAverns, H., Oxtoby, J., Taylor, H. G., JONES, P. W., Dziedzic, K., & Dawes, P. T. (1996) · Rheumatology · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/35.4.373 · Cited by 133
Mackay, K., Brophy, S. T., Mack, C., Doran, M. F., & Călin, A. (2000) · PubMed · Cited by 109
ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS: THE CORRELATION BETWEEN A NEW METROLOGY SCORE AND RADIOLOGY
KENNEDY, L. G., Jenkinson, T., MALLORIE, P. A., Whitelock, H., GARRETT, S. L., & Călin, A. (1995) · Rheumatology · doi:10.1093/rheumatology/34.8.767 · Cited by 78
Cited by
Mandl, P., Navarro-Compán, V, Terslev, L., Aegerter, P., van der Heijde, D., D'Agostino, M. A., Baraliakos, X., Pedersen, S. J., Jurik, A. G., Naredo, E., et al. (2015) · Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases · doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-206971 · Cited by 572
Self-citationMaksymowych, W. P., Inman, R. D., Salonen, D., Dhillon, S. S., Williams, M., Stone, M., Conner‐spady, B., Palsat, J., & Lambert, R. G. W. (2005) · Arthritis Care & Research · doi:10.1002/art.21445 · Cited by 531
Baraliakos, X., Haibel, H., Listing, J., Sieper, J., & Braun, J. (2014) · Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases · doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-202698 · Cited by 305
The Definition and Measurement of Disease Modification in Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases
Aletaha, D., & Smolen, J. S. (2006) · Rheumatic Disease Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.rdc.2005.09.005 · Cited by 152
Metadata
- Authors
- Wanders, A. J. B., Landewé, R. B. M., Spoorenberg, A., Dougados, M., van der Linden, S., Mielants, H., van der Tempel, H., & van der Heijde, D. M. F. M.
- Venue
- Arthritis & Rheumatism
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-08
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2622-2632
- ISSN
- 0004-3591 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-0131
- OpenAlex
- W2035645263
- Cited by
- 379
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 8.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What is the most appropriate radiologic scoring method for ankylosing spondylitis?: A comparison of the available methods based on the outcome measures in rheumatology clinical trials filter. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/art.20446
- The paper
- Wanders, A. J. B., Landewé, R. B. M., Spoorenberg, A., Dougados, M., van der Linden, S., Mielants, H., van der Tempel, H., & van der Heijde, D. M. F. M. (2004). What is the most appropriate radiologic scoring method for ankylosing spondylitis?: A comparison of the available methods based on the outcome measures in rheumatology clinical trials filter. Arthritis & Rheumatism. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.20446
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
