CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 214Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesStatistical Methods in Clinical TrialsMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reporting disease activity in clinical trials of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: EULAR/ACR collaborative recommendations

Aletaha, D., Landewe, R., Karonitsch, T., Bathon, J., Boers, M., Bombardier, C., Bombardieri, S., Choi, H., Combe, B., Dougados, M., Emery, P., Gomez‐Reino, J., Keystone, E., Koch, G., Kvien, T. K., Martin‐Mola, E., Matucci‐Cerinic, M., Michaud, K., O'dell, J., Paulus, H., Pincus, T., Richards, P., Simon, L., Siegel, J., Smolen, J. S., Sokka, T., Strand, V., Tugwell, P., van der Heijde, D., van Riel, P., Vlad, S., van Vollenhoven, R., Ward, M., Weinblatt, M., Wells, G., White, B., Wolfe, F., Zhang, B., Zink, A., Felson, D.·2008·Arthritis Care & Research
DOI 10.1002/art.24123
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective: To make recommendations on how to report disease activity in clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) endorsed by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). Methods: The project followed the EULAR standardized operating procedures, which use a three‐step approach: 1) expert‐based definition of relevant research questions (November 2006); 2) systematic literature search (November 2006 to May 2007); and 3) expert consensus on recommendations based on the literature search results (May 2007). In addition, since this is the first joint EULAR/ACR publication on recommendations, an extra step included a meeting with an ACR panel to approve the recommendations elaborated by the expert group (August 2007). Results: Eleven relevant questions were identified for the literature search. Based on the evidence from the literature, the expert panel recommended that each trial should report the following items: 1) disease activity response and disease activity states; 2) appropriate descriptive statistics of the baseline, the endpoints and change of the single variables included in the core set; 3) baseline disease activity levels (in general); 4) the percentage of patients achieving a low disease activity state and remission; 5) time to onset of the primary outcome; 6) sustainability of the primary outcome; 7) fatigue. Conclusion: These recommendations endorsed by EULAR and ACR will help harmonize the presentations of results from clinical trials. Adherence to these recommendations will provide the readership of clinical trials with more details of important outcomes, while the higher level of homogeneity may facilitate the comparison of outcomes across different trials and pooling of trial results, such as in meta‐analyses.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/art.24123

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 17 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. US Food and Drug Administration, 1999, FDA guidance paper
  2. European Medicines Agency, 1999, EMEA points to consider

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–213 of 213

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Aletaha, D., Landewe, R., Karonitsch, T., Bathon, J., Boers, M., Bombardier, C., Bombardieri, S., Choi, H., Combe, B., Dougados, M., Emery, P., Gomez‐Reino, J., Keystone, E., Koch, G., Kvien, T. K., Martin‐Mola, E., Matucci‐Cerinic, M., Michaud, K., O'dell, J., Paulus, H., Pincus, T., Richards, P., Simon, L., Siegel, J., Smolen, J. S., Sokka, T., Strand, V., Tugwell, P., van der Heijde, D., van Riel, P., Vlad, S., van Vollenhoven, R., Ward, M., Weinblatt, M., Wells, G., White, B., Wolfe, F., Zhang, B., Zink, A., & Felson, D.
Affiliations
  • Medical University of Vienna (AT)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
  • Institute for Work & Health (CA)
  • University of Pisa (IT)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier (FR)
  • Université Paris Descartes (FR)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Diakonhjemmet Hospital (NO)
  • University of Florence (IT)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • United States Food and Drug Administration (US)
  • Central Finland Health Care District (FI)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • Boston University (US)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • Arthritis Foundation (US)
  • Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
ORCID
Venue
Arthritis Care & Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-09-29
Volume
59
Issue
10
Pages
1371-1377
ISSN
  • 0893-7524 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-0123
DOI
10.1002/art.24123
OpenAlex
W2099680326
Cited by
214
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 17
FWCI
10.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Arthritis Care & Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
  • Florence Research (University of Florence) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Versus Arthritis (18475)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
Keywords
rheumatoid arthritis, disease activity, clinical trial reporting, reporting guidelines, low disease activity, remission, fatigue, outcome harmonization
MeSH terms
Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Clinical Trials as Topic, Cooperative Behavior, Humans, Antirheumatic Agents, Evidence-Based Medicine

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