↓ Skip to main content

The Journal of Rheumatology

Content and Construct Validity, Reliability, and Responsiveness of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Flare Questionnaire: OMERACT 2016 Workshop Report

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Rheumatology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Content and Construct Validity, Reliability, and Responsiveness of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Flare Questionnaire: OMERACT 2016 Workshop Report
Published in
Journal of Rheumatology, August 2017
DOI 10.3899/jrheum.161145
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan J Bartlett, Skye P Barbic, Vivian P Bykerk, Ernest H Choy, Rieke Alten, Robin Christensen, Alfons den Broeder, Bruno Fautrel, Daniel E Furst, Francis Guillemin, Sarah Hewlett, Amye L Leong, Anne Lyddiatt, Lyn March, Pamela Montie, Christoph Pohl, Marieke Scholte Voshaar, Thasia G Woodworth, Clifton O Bingham

Abstract

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) Flare Group was established to develop a reliable way to identify and measure RA flares in randomized controlled trials (RCT). Here, we summarized the development and field testing of the RA Flare Questionnaire (RA-FQ), and the voting results at OMERACT 2016. Classic and modern psychometric methods were used to assess reliability, validity, sensitivity, factor structure, scoring, and thresholds. Interviews with patients and clinicians also assessed content validity, utility, and meaningfulness of RA-FQ scores. People with RA in observational trials in Canada (n = 896) and France (n = 138), and an RCT in the Netherlands (n = 178) completed 5 items (11-point numerical rating scale) representing RA Flare core domains. There was moderate to high evidence of reliability, content and construct validity, and responsiveness. Factor analysis supported unidimensionality. Rasch analysis showed acceptable fit to the Rasch model, with items and people covering a broad measurement continuum and evidence of appropriate targeting of items to people, ordered thresholds, minimal differential item functioning by language, sex, or age. A summative score across items is defensible, yielding an interval score (0-50) where higher scores reflect worsening flare. The RA-FQ received endorsement from 88% of attendees that it passed the OMERACT Filter 2.0 "Eyeball Test" for instrument selection. The RA-FQ has been developed to identify and measure RA flares. Its review through OMERACT Filter 2.0 shows evidence of reliability, content and construct validity, and responsiveness. These properties merit its further validation as an outcome for clinical trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Researcher 6 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Other 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 10 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 14 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 15 July 2022.
All research outputs
#3,275,949
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Rheumatology
#580
of 3,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,291
of 326,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Rheumatology
#11
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,951 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
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 326,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.