Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 232

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Identifying the clinical domains of fibromyalgia: Contributions from clinician and patient delphi exercises

Open access
Mease, Phillip J., Arnold, Lesley M., Crofford, Leslie J., Williams, David A., Russell, I. Jon, Humphrey, Louise, Abetz, Linda, Martin, Susan A.·2008·Arthritis Care & Research

Abstract

Objective: In evaluating the effectiveness of fibromyalgia (FM) therapies, it is important to assess the impact of those therapies on the full array of domains considered important by both clinicians and patients. The objective of this research was to identify and prioritize the key clinically relevant and important domains impacted by FM that should be evaluated by outcome assessment instruments used in FM clinical trials, and to approach consensus among clinicians and patients on the priority of those domains to be assessed in clinical care and research. Methods: Group consensus was achieved using the Delphi method, a structured process of consensus building via questionnaires together with systematic and controlled opinion feedback. The Delphi exercises involved 23 clinicians with expertise in FM and 100 patients with FM as defined by American College of Rheumatology criteria. Results: The Delphi exercise revealed that the domains ranked most highly by patients were similar to the domain rankings by clinicians. Pain was consistently ranked highest by both panels. Fatigue, impact on sleep, health‐related quality of life, comorbid depression, and cognitive difficulty were also ranked highly. Stiffness was ranked highly by patients but not clinicians. In contrast, side effects was important to clinicians but was not identified as important in the patient Delphi exercise. Conclusion: The clinician and patient Delphi exercises identified and ranked key domains that need to be assessed in FM research. Based on these results, a conceptual framework for measuring patient‐reported outcomes is proposed.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/art.23826

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 232

Metadata

Authors
Mease, P. J., Arnold, L. M., Crofford, L. J., Williams, D. A., Russell, I. J., Humphrey, L., Abetz, L., & Martin, S. A.
Venue
Arthritis Care & Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-06-24
Volume
59
Issue
7
Pages
952-960
ISSN
  • 0893-7524 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-0123
OpenAlex
W2059757133
Cited by
232
References
3
FWCI
15.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Identifying the clinical domains of fibromyalgia: Contributions from clinician and patient delphi exercises. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/art.23826
The paper
Mease, P. J., Arnold, L. M., Crofford, L. J., Williams, D. A., Russell, I. J., Humphrey, L., Abetz, L., & Martin, S. A. (2008). Identifying the clinical domains of fibromyalgia: Contributions from clinician and patient delphi exercises. Arthritis Care & Research. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.23826

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.