| Title |
Poor prognostic factors guiding treatment decisions in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a review of data from randomized clinical trials and cohort studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Arthritis Research & Therapy, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13075-017-1266-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Katinka Albrecht, Angela Zink |
| Abstract |
Prognostic factors are used for treatment decisions in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). High disease activity, the early presence of erosions, and autoantibody positivity are the most frequently used poor prognostic factors but other features, such as functional disability, extraarticular disease, or multibiomarkers, are also assessed. Prognostic factors are incorporated in current treatment recommendations for the management of RA and are used as inclusion criteria in randomized controlled trials. They are defined heterogeneously and the relevance of a single or combined presence of poor prognostic factors remains unclear. This review summarizes the current definitions of poor prognostic factors and their use in clinical research. Perspectives on future research are also outlined. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Singapore | 1 | 20% |
| Bulgaria | 1 | 20% |
| Italy | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 94 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 17% |
| Unknown | 32 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 38% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 32 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 April 2017.
All research outputs
#14,280,554
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#2,081
of 3,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,421
of 322,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#21
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,380 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 322,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.