Instrument Selection Using the OMERACT Filter 2.1: The OMERACT Methodology

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024

PURPOSE

Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

METHODS

The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement.

RESULTS

From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts.

CONCLUSION

PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Validation and incorporation of digital entheses into a preliminary GLobal OMERACT Ultrasound DActylitis Score (GLOUDAS) in psoriatic arthritis

OBJECTIVES

The main objective was to generate a GLobal OMERACT Ultrasound DActylitis Score (GLOUDAS) in psoriatic arthritis and to test its reliability. To this end, we assessed the validity, feasibility and applicability of ultrasound assessment of finger entheses to incorporate them into the scoring system.

METHODS

The study consisted of a stepwise process. First, in cadaveric specimens, we identified enthesis sites of the fingers by ultrasound and gross anatomy, and then verified presence of entheseal tissue in histological samples. We then selected the entheses to be incorporated into a dactylitis scoring system through a Delphi consensus process among international experts. Next, we established and defined the ultrasound components of dactylitis and their scoring systems using Delphi methodology. Finally, we tested the interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the consensus- based scoring systemin patients with psoriatic dactylitis.

RESULTS

32 entheses were identified in cadaveric fingers. The presence of entheseal tissues was confirmed in all cadaveric samples. Of these, following the consensus process, 12 entheses were selected for inclusion in GLOUDAS. Ultrasound components of GLOUDAS agreed on through the Delphi process were synovitis, tenosynovitis, enthesitis, subcutaneous tissue inflammation and periextensor tendon inflammation. The scoring system for each component was also agreed on. Interobserver reliability was fair to good (κ 0.39-0.71) and intraobserver reliability good to excellent (κ 0.80-0.88) for dactylitis components. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement for the total B-mode and Doppler mode scores (sum of the scores of the individual abnormalities) were excellent (interobserver intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.98 for B-mode and 0.99 for Doppler mode; intraobserver ICC 0.98 for both modes).

CONCLUSIONS

We have produced a consensus-driven ultrasound dactylitis scoring system that has shown acceptable interobserver reliability and excellent intraobserver reliability. Through anatomical knowledge, small entheses of the fingers were identified and histologically validated.

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024

PURPOSE

Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

METHODS

The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement.

RESULTS

From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts.

CONCLUSION

PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024

PURPOSE

Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

METHODS

The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement.

RESULTS

From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts.

CONCLUSION

PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

METHODS

The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement.

RESULTS

From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts.

CONCLUSION

PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: This paper was jointly developed by Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Quality of Life Research, Journal of Patient Reported Outcomes, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes and jointly published by Elsevier Inc, Springer Nature Switzerland AG, and BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature. The articles are identical except for minor stylistic and spelling differences in keeping with each journal's style. Either citation can be used when citing this article.

The Tophus Impact Questionnaire (TIQ-20): responsiveness to change during urate-lowering therapy

OBJECTIVES

In 2015, the 20-item Tophus Impact Questionnaire (TIQ-20) was developed as a tophus-specific patient-reported outcome measure. The aim of this study was to determine whether TIQ-20 scores change during urate-lowering therapy.

METHODS

We analysed data from a 2-year clinical trial of allopurinol dose escalation using a treat-to-target serum urate approach. For participants with tophaceous gout, the longest diameter of up to three index tophi was measured, using Vernier calipers, and the TIQ-20 was recorded at study visits. Participants at the one site were invited to participate in a dual-energy CT (DECT) substudy. Participants were included in this analysis if they had tophaceous gout and TIQ-20 scores available at baseline, Year 1 and Year 2 (n = 58, 39 with DECT data). Data were analysed using a mixed-model approach to repeated measures.

RESULTS

Improvements were observed in all tophus measures over the 2-year period. The mean (s.d.) TIQ-20 scores reduced over 2 years from 3.59 (1.77) to 2.46 (1.73), P < 0.0001, and the mean (95% CI) TIQ-20 change over the 2 years was -1.13 (-1.54, -0.71). The effect size (Cohen's d) for the change in the sum of the index tophi diameter over 2 years was 0.68, for the DECT urate volume was 0.50, and for the TIQ-20 was 0.71.

CONCLUSION

For people with tophaceous gout treated with allopurinol using a treat-to-target serum urate approach, improvements in TIQ-20 occurred, as did improvements in physical and imaging tophus measures. These findings demonstrate that the TIQ-20 is a responsive patient-reported instrument of tophus impact.

A clinical perspective on imaging in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

In recent years, imaging has become increasingly important to confirm diagnosis, monitor disease activity, and predict disease course and outcome in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). Over the past few decades, great efforts have been made to improve the quality of diagnostic imaging and to reach a consensus on which methods and scoring systems to use. However, there are still some critical issues, and the diagnosis, course, and management of JIA are closely related to clinical assessment. This review discusses the main indications for conventional radiography (XR), musculoskeletal ultrasound (US), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), while trying to maintain a clinical perspective. The diagnostic-therapeutic timing at which one or the other method should be used, depending on the disease/patient phenotype, will be assessed, considering the main advantages and disadvantages of each imaging modality according to the currently available literature. Some brief clinical case scenarios on the most frequently and severely involved joints in JIA are also presented.

Developing standards for MRI evaluation of joints in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis utilizing the temporomandibular joint as a model

The treatment of a patient with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is best monitored with standardized and validated tools to measure joint changes over time. Treatment approaches are best indicated if the clinicians are aware of the structural status of the joint at a given time, especially in anatomically deep joints for which clinical assessment is limited. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is of utmost importance for assessment of deep joints and extra-articular soft tissue of the entire body for which ultrasound may be suboptimal. Because the distinction between pathologic and physiologic joint changes on MRI is key for proper diagnosis and treatment of patients with arthropathies, a comprehensive standardized approach is needed to effectively measure outcomes of growing joints of children with JIA. Such an approach is essential for both clinical assessment and to conduct clinical trials in patients with JIA treated in different centers around the world. To meet this need, several international imaging collaborative research groups have been developing MRI scales over the past years, including the MRI in JIA (JAMRI) special interest group within the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) research network. This manuscript reviews the efforts of the OMERACT JAMRI working group to generate and validate pediatric MRI scoring systems for different joints in children with JIA that can have ubiquitous utilization anywhere in the world. In particular, it describes the different steps of development and validation of an MRI scale using the TMJ as a model.

Integrity of randomized clinical trials: Performance of integrity tests and checklists requires assessment

The integrity of randomized clinical trials (RCT) has become a concern owing to a recent rise in the number of retractions and the repercussions this has for evidence-based patient care. However, there is little research on the subject of RCT integrity assessment. Recent literature reviews have revealed that journals' authors' instructions concerning integrity and their investigation policies concerning allegations of misconduct are heterogeneous. The judicious use of integrity tests applied to RCT manuscripts is hampered by an absence of data concerning misconduct prevalence (pre-test probability), a failure to evaluate test performance (validity) and a lack of consensus over a gold standard (against which test accuracy can be evaluated). These deficiencies hinder the post-publication correction of RCT records, the integrity evaluations in systematic reviews of RCTs and the prospective application of preventive solutions in RCT peer-review and preprint assessment. Dealing with the current controversy about trustworthiness of RCT evidence requires a strong investment in research, reform and education concerning research integrity. The purpose of this review article is to highlight the current limitations in dealing with trial integrity-related concerns and to propose solutions to some of these issues.

Composite measures to assess disease damage, disease severity and treatment response in systemic sclerosis clinical trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study was to summarize the composite outcome measures available to assess disease damage, severity and treatment response in systemic sclerosis (SSc).

RECENT FINDINGS

There have been many recent efforts to rigorously develop and validate composite outcome measures to assess the totality of the impact of SSc on patients. All initiatives have used both consensus and data-driven methods. Recently developed are a SSc-specific damage index, a patient-reported disease impact questionnaire (ScleroID) and a treatment response index (ACR-CRISS).

SUMMARY

Multiorgan, composite measures are being increasingly applied to assess treatment efficacy in clinical trials. Although a fully validated, disease-specific composite measure is not yet available, there has been significant recent progress towards developing measures of treatment response, damage and overall impact of SSc for application in randomized controlled trials.

Nailfold capillaroscopy as diagnostic test in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: A systematic review

Up to 30 % of patients with psoriasis (PsO) develop psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and diagnosis can be difficult. Nailfold capillaroscopy (NC) is an easily applicable, non-invasive procedure to assess skin microcirculation. This systematic review investigates NC as diagnostic tool for PsO and PsA, including correlations between NC outcome measures to clinical and laboratory outcome measures. This systematic review was built on the PICO and PRISMA guidelines. In total 22 relevant studies were found Searching in the Web of Science, PubMed and Embase, latest update June 13th, 2022. The following NC outcome measures are found to be significantly more prevalent in PsO patients than healthy controls: reduced density, reduced length and more abnormal morphology. Likewise, in PsA patients, reduced density, more abnormal morphology, more microhaemorrhages and fewer hairpin shapes are found to be significantly more prevalent. Results were non-conclusive in terms of disease activity and duration with NC findings. Random-effects meta-analysis showed a significant reduction of density in PsO patients compared to healthy controls (studies: 6, n = 249; SMD = -0.91; 95 % CI [-1.41, -0.40], p = 0.0058, heterogeneity I²=74 %, AUC = 0.740) and in PsA patients compared to healthy controls (studies: 5, n = 130; SMD = -1.22; 95 % CI [-2.38, -0.06], p = 0.0432, heterogeneity I²=89 %, AUC = 0.806). No NC outcome measures were overall conclusive in differentiating PsO from PsA. Considering the conflicting results and small sample sizes further large-scale research on the identification of capillaroscopic changes in PsO and PsA and correlations with standardised clinical and laboratory outcome measures are necessary.

Modified Juvenile Spondyloarthritis Disease Activity Index in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) Registry

OBJECTIVE

To validate the Juvenile Spondyloarthritis Disease Activity Index (JSpADA), and modified versions thereof, in a North American cohort of patients with enthesitis-related arthritis (ERA).

METHODS

We utilized the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance Registry database ERA cohort to validate the JSpADA and its modifications (JSpADA6-no Schober, no C-reactive protein [CRP]/erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR]; JSpADA7-no Schober; and JSpADA7-no CRP/ESR) using the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology principles of face validity, discriminative validity, and responsiveness to change.

RESULTS

There were 51 subjects (64 visits) with complete JSpADA data with a mean age of 13.7 years and disease duration of 30.9 months. Subjects were predominantly White (84.3%), and 56.9% were male and 50% were HLA-B27 positive. The JSpADA showed high correlation with the clinical 10-joint Juvenile Arthritis Disease Activity Score (cJADAS10; r = 0.81), moderate-to-high correlation with physician global assessment (PGA; r = 0.69), and low-to-fair correlation with Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (CHAQ; r = 0.22). The modifications of the JSpADA (JSpADA7-no Schober; JSpADA7-no CRP/ESR; and JSpADA6-no Schober, no CRP/ESR) performed similarly with high correlation with cJADAS10 (r = 0.81, 0.79, and 0.80, respectively), moderate-to-high correlation with PGA (r = 0.65, 0.67, 0.64, respectively), and low-to-fair correlation with CHAQ (r = 0.35, 0.34, 0.39, respectively). All modified versions of JSpADA had good responsiveness to change. All versions of JSpADA had excellent discriminative validity.

CONCLUSION

We propose the term modified JSpADA for the modification of JSpADA with 6 elements (JSpADA6-no Schober, no CRP/ESR). This shorter disease activity index may improve implementation of JSpADA in both clinical practice and research trials.

Development of a standard set of PROs and generic PROMs for Dutch medical specialist care : Recommendations from the Outcome-Based Healthcare Program Working Group Generic PROMs

PURPOSE

The added value of measuring patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for delivering patient-centered care and assessment of healthcare quality is increasingly evident. However, healthcare system wide data collection initiatives are hampered by the proliferation of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and conflicting data collection standards. As part of a national initiative of the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport we developed a consensus-based standard set of generic PROs and PROMs to be implemented across Dutch medical specialist care.

METHODS

A working group of mandated representatives of umbrella organizations involved in Dutch medical specialist care, together with PROM experts and patient organizations worked through a structured, consensus-driven co-creation process. This included literature reviews, online expert and working group meetings, and feedback from national patient- and umbrella organizations. The 'PROM-cycle' methodology was used to select feasible, valid, and reliable PROMs to obtain domain scores for each of the PROs included in the set.

RESULTS

Eight PROs across different domains of health were ultimately endorsed: symptoms (pain & fatigue), functioning (physical, social/participation, mental [anxiety & depression]), and overarching (quality of life & perceived overall health). A limited number of generic PROMs was endorsed. PROMIS short forms were selected as the preferred instruments for all PROs. Several recommendations were formulated to facilitate healthcare system level adoption and implementation of the standard set.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a consensus-based standard set of Generic PROMs and a set of recommendations to facilitate healthcare system wide implementation across Dutch medical specialist care.

Patient Experienced Symptom State in rheumatoid arthritis: sensitivity to change in disease activity and impact

OBJECTIVES

The Patient Experienced Symptom State (PESS) is a single-question, patient-reported outcome that is validated to assess global disease impact in RA. This study addresses its sensitivity to change, and reliability.

METHODS

Disease activity, disease impact in the seven domains of RA Impact of Disease (RAID) and PESS were assessed in patients with RA from the NOR-DMARD registry, at two visits, 6 months apart. The PESS over the last week was scored at five levels, from 'very bad' to 'very good'. Disease impact and disease activity were compared between patients who improved, maintained or worsened PESS over time, through one-way analysis of variance, with post hoc Bonferroni correction. Correlations between changes in these parameters were assessed through Spearman's correlation coefficient. Sensitivity to change was assessed by standardized response mean (SRM) between the two visits. Reliability was analysed through intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between the two visits in patients with stable disease activity and impact.

RESULTS

In 353 patients [76.8% females, mean (s.d.) 9.9 (9.6) years disease duration], improvement in PESS level was associated with substantial improvements in mean impact in all domains as well as disease activity (P <0.02). PESS change was moderately to strongly correlated with RAID domains and disease activity (rho: 0.4-0.7). PESS was responsive to change (SRM: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.76), particularly among RAID responders (SRM: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.54, 1.99). PESS was moderately reliable in patients with stable condition (ICC: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.52, 0.83).

CONCLUSION

PESS is valid, feasible, reliable and responsive, representing an opportunity to improve the assessment of disease impact with minimal questionnaire burden.

Patient-defined flares and disease activity worsening in 222 patients with psoriatic arthritis from 14 countries

OBJECTIVES

To explore patient-defined flares in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), compared to an increase in disease activity in psoriatic arthritis (DAPSA) and to analyze the validity of a patient-reported flare question.

METHODS

ReFlap (NCT03119805) was a longitudinal study in 14 countries of consecutive patients with definite PsA. Patients were seen twice in the context of usual care, 4.5±2.2 months apart. Flares were reported by patients and physicians at the second visit using a single question. DAPSA worsening was defined as a change to a higher DAPSA category. Agreement between the definitions of worsening was calculated by prevalence adjusted bias adjusted kappa (PABAK). Validity of patient-reported flare was assessed by comparing patients with versus without flare and transition to flares.

RESULTS

In 222 patients, mean disease duration 10.8±8.3 years, 127 (58.8%) males: disease activity was low (mean DAPSA 11.5±14.0); 63.3% received a bDMARD. Patient-reported flares between the 2 visits were seen in 27% patients (for these patients, mean 2.2±3.7 flares per patient, mean duration 12.6±21.0 days per flare). Physician- reported flares were seen in 17.6% and worsening in DAPSA in 40.1% of patients. Agreement between definitions was moderate (PABAK=0.32-0.59). Patients in flare had significantly more active disease than patients not in flare for all outcomes (all P<0.001). At the patient-level, transition to flare state was associated to a worsening in disease activity and impact outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient flares were frequent and were associated with active and symptomatic disease. These findings provide preliminary validation for patient-reported flares in PsA.

Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue is a reliable and valid measure in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis

Background

The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) scale has demonstrated good internal consistency and responsiveness to changes in clinical status among patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). We aimed to further evaluate the psychometric properties of the FACIT-F scale in adult patients with AS.

Methods

Measurement properties of the FACIT-F scale were evaluated using data from tofacitinib phase 2/3 (NCT01786668/NCT03502616) studies in adult patients with active AS.

Results

Second-order confirmatory factor modeling supported the measurement structure of the FACIT-F scale (Bentler’s comparative fit index ≥ 0.91), and FACIT-F demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s coefficient α ≥ 0.88) and test–retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient ≥ 0.75). Correlation coefficients between FACIT-F and other patient-reported outcomes generally exceeded 0.40, supporting convergent validity. Meaningful within-patient change was estimated as 3.1–6.3 for FACIT-F total score, and 1.4–2.8 and 1.7–3.6 for FACIT-F Experience and Impact domain scores, respectively. Large (effect size ≥ 1.17 standard deviation units), statistically significant differences in FACIT-F domain/total scores between ‘no disease activity’ (Patient Global Assessment of Disease Activity [PtGA] = 0) and ‘very active disease’ (PtGA = 10) patient groups supported known-groups validity. Ability to detect change was evidenced by an approximately linear relationship between changes in FACIT-F and PtGA scores.

Conclusions

FACIT-F is a reliable and valid measure for evaluating fatigue in adult patients with active AS.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT01786668 (registered 6 February 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01786668) and NCT03502616 (registered 11 April 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03502616).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41687-022-00508-0.

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) is a disease that causes pain and stiffness in the spine. AS is a chronic disease. Most people with AS experience fatigue (a feeling of being very tired or exhausted). People with more severe AS tend to have more fatigue and a lower level of well-being. Because of this, fatigue is an important symptom to measure in studies of AS. The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-F) is a questionnaire that measures fatigue. It has 13 questions that assess level of fatigue over a week’s time. The FACIT-F has not been studied in depth in people with AS. Therefore, we analyzed results from two clinical trials. We found that FACIT-F was a reliable and valid way to measure fatigue in adults with AS. This makes it a suitable tool to use in AS clinical trials.

Inspecting Decorative Ceramic Defects by Fusing Convolutional Neural Network and Image Recognition

The intelligent inspection of ceramic decorative defects is one of the hot research at present. This work aims to improve the defect inspection automation of finished decorative ceramic workpieces. First, it introduces the multi-target detection algorithm and compares the performance of different network models on the public data set. Second, the initial images are collected on the spot. The initial pictures are easy to produce noise in actual deployment, affecting the image quality. Therefore, image preprocessing is performed for the initial images, and a median filtering method is used to calculate the denoising. Finally, the original You Only Look Once version 3 network model is realized. Based on this, the decorative ceramic-oriented Automated Surface Defect Inspection model is proposed. Then, decorative ceramic defect images are inputted for model training. The experimental conclusions are deeply studied and analyzed. The results show that the proposed decorative ceramic-oriented Automated Surface Defect Inspection model based on Deep Learning technology has good feature extraction and inspection ability. The detection accuracy is 94.90% on the test set, and the detection speed reaches 25 frames per second. Compared with the traditional manual inspection method, the proposed model greatly improves the inspection effect and can meet the on-site inspection requirements of surface defects of decorative ceramics under complex backgrounds. It is of great significance to improve the quality inspection efficiency and economic benefits of China's decorative ceramics industry.

Facilitating and supporting the engagement of patients, families and caregivers in research: the "Ottawa model" for patient engagement in research

BACKGROUND

Patient engagement is increasingly being recognized as a critical component of health research; however, institutional models for building infrastructure and capacity for patient engagement in research are limited. There is an opportunity to create reproducible and scalable models of patient engagement in research and share best and promising practices.

MAIN BODY

In this article, we describe the development and features of the framework for the Ottawa Patient Engagement in Research Model at The Ottawa Hospital (TOH) and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute (OHRI). Key components of the model include: a Patient and Family Engagement Program at TOH, which recruits, educates, and supports patients, families and caregivers to engage in clinical care, governance, and research; the Ottawa Methods Centre within the OHRI, which leads methodological research and provides support to investigators for patient engagement and patient-oriented research at TOH; and the Office of Patient Engagement in Research Activities, also within the OHRI, which facilitates collaborations between patients, researchers, clinicians and other stakeholders. Early success of this model can be attributed to aligned institutional priorities between TOH, OHRI and patients, the establishment of a patient engagement policy, ongoing education and support provided to patient partners and researchers, and innovative recruitment, tracking and evaluation procedures. Ongoing challenges and next steps include promoting diversity among patient partners, implementing an equitable compensation policy, engaging patients across a variety of roles and research areas, and developing resources to expand and sustain this program.

CONCLUSION

This model represents a unique effort of patients, clinicians, researchers, and policymakers across disciplines and institutions to produce a harmonized strategy and infrastructure for meaningful collaboration with patients and families in health research, and capacity building in patient-oriented research.

PROTOCOL: Mapping the scientific knowledge and approaches to defining and measuring hate crime, hate speech, and hate incidents

The overallaim of the review is to map the definitions and measurement tools used to capture the whole spectrum of hate motivated behaviors, including hate crime, hate speech and hate incidents. This will benefit the field of hate studies by providing a baseline that can inform the building of cumulative knowledge and comparative research. The first review objective is to map definitions of hate crime, hate incidents, hate speech, and surrogate terms. Specific research questions underpinning this objective are: (a) How are hate crimes, hate speech and hate incidents defined in the academic, legal, policy, and programming literature?; (b) What are the concepts, parameters and criteria that qualify a behavior as being hate crime, hate incident or hate speech?; and (c) What are the most common concepts, parameters and criteria found across definitions? What are the differences between definitions and the elements they contain? The second review objective is to map the tools used to measure the prevalence of hate crime, hate incidents, hate speech, and surrogate terms. Specific research questions underpinning this objective are: (a) How are definitions operationalised to measure hate crimes, hate speech, and hate incidents?; and (b) How valid and reliable are these measures?

Physician Global Assessment International Standardisation COnsensus in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: the PISCOS study

The Physician Global Assessment International Standardisation COnsensus in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (PISCOS) study aimed to obtain an evidence-based and expert-based consensus standardisation of the Physician Global Assessment (PGA) scoring of disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). An international panel of 79 SLE experts participated in a three-round Delphi consensus process, in which 41 statements related to the PGA in SLE were rated, using a 0 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree) numerical rating scale. Statements with agreement of 75% or greater were selected and further validated by the expert panel. Consensus was reached on 27 statements, grouped in 14 recommendations, for the use of the PGA in SLE, design of the PGA scale, practical considerations for PGA scoring, and the relationship between PGA values and levels of disease activity. Among these recommendations, the expert panel agreed that the PGA should consist of a 0-3 visual analogue scale for measuring disease activity in patients with SLE in the preceding month. The PGA is intended to rate the overall disease activity, taking into account the severity of active manifestations and clinical laboratory results, but excluding organ damage, serology, and subjective findings unrelated to disease activity. The PGA scale ranges from "no disease activity" (0) to the "most severe disease activity" (3) and incorporates the values 1 and 2 as inner markers to categorise disease activity as mild (≥0·5 to 1), moderate (>1 and ≤2) and severe (>2 to 3). Only experienced physicians can rate the PGA, and it should be preferably scored by the same rater at each visit. The PISCOS results will allow for increased homogeneity and reliability of PGA ratings in routine clinical practice, definitions of remission and low disease activity, and future SLE trials.

Evaluation of the psychometric properties of patient-reported and clinician-reported outcome measures of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a COSMIN systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a poorly understood side effect of many antineoplastic agents. Patients may experience sensory, motor and autonomic symptoms, negatively impacting quality of life. A gold-standard assessment methodology has yet to be determined, limiting efforts to identify effective agents to prevent or treat CIPN.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a protocol of a systematic review of psychometric analyses of CIPN Clinician Reported Outcome Measures (ClinROM) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROM) among adults receiving, or who had previously received chemotherapy for cancer. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) quality ratings will be compared across studies and across ClinROMs and PROMs. Studies reporting psychometric proprieties of CIPN ClinROMs and/or PROMs among adults aged ≥18 years will be eligible for inclusion, with no restriction on language or year of publication. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and APA PsycINFO databases will be searched from inception to 31 December 2021. Study characteristics, measurement properties of the ClinROMs and/or PROMs and the CIPN definitions will be extracted. The Synthesis Without Meta-analysis guideline will be used to guide data synthesis. The COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist will be used by two independent raters to assess methodological quality. Subgroup analyses by age, chemotherapy type, and study timing in relation to the delivery of chemotherapy will be carried out where data are available. An adapted version of Outcome Measures in Rheumatology filter 2.1 will be used to provide a best-evidence synthesis of CIPN ClinROMs and PROMs and to recommend a CIPN assessment tool for clinical and research settings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not necessary to be obtained for this systematic review protocol. Results will be disseminated to clinicians and policy-makers by publication in a peer-reviewed journal and by presenting at relevant conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021278168.

An International Delphi Exercise to Identify Items of Importance for Measuring Response to Treatment in ANCA-Associated Vasculitis

OBJECTIVE

ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) is characterized by fluctuating levels of disease activity, but no formal criteria exist to measure response to treatment. This Delphi exercise aimed to reach consensus about which measures are considered by patients and physicians to be most important when assessing response to treatment in clinical trials of AAV.

METHODS

An international 3-round online Delphi exercise was conducted. Survey participants included patients with AAV and physicians with expertise in AAV. Survey participants were asked to rate (on a scale of 1-9) the importance of each item when assessing response to treatment in AAV. Items scored 7-9 by ≥70% participants were considered highly important.

RESULTS

89 patients and 176 physicians completed three rounds of the Delphi exercise. The most highly rated items of response involved disease activity [extent of organ involvement, physician global assessment], mortality [survival], and patient-reported outcomes [patient global assessment and health-related quality of life measures]. Achievement of specific BVAS scores were highly rated only by physicians. Items highly rated only by patients included laboratory measures [changes on urinalysis and acute phase reactants], pain, and fatigue. Additional items related to damage and adverse events were highly rated by both groups.

CONCLUSION

There is consensus between patients and physicians on many items considered important to measure when assessing response to treatment in AAV. There are some items considered important by only patients or only physicians. These data will inform the next steps in the development criteria of response to treatment in AAV.

Psychometric properties of outcome measurement instruments for ANCA-associated vasculitis: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the psychometric properties of outcome measurement instruments used in ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV).

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane, Scopus and Web of Science were searched from inception to 14 July 2020 for validation studies of instruments used in AAV. Following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and OMERACT frameworks, different psychometric properties (validity, reliability, responsiveness and feasibility) were summarized. Risk of bias was assessed according to the COSMIN checklist.

RESULTS

From 2505 articles identified, 32 met the predefined selection criteria, providing information on 22 instruments assessing disease activity (n = 7), damage (n = 2), activity and damage (n = 1), health-related quality of life (HRQoL; n = 9) and function (n = 3). Most of the instruments were tested in AAV as a group or in granulomatosis with polyangiitis only.The BVAS, any version, the Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI) and the AAV-Patient-Reported Outcome (AAV-PRO) have been more extensively validated than the other instruments. BVAS for Wegener Granulomatosis (BVAS/WG) has been shown to be valid for measuring disease activity [correlation with Physician global assessment (r = 0.90)], reliability (inter-observer intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.97), responsiveness and feasibility. For damage, VDI was shown to be moderately valid (correlations with BVAS version 3 at 6 months r = 0.14, BVAS/WG at 1 year r = 0.40 and 5 years r = 0.20), and feasible. For HRQoL, AAV-PRO demonstrated validity (correlations of the six AAV-PRO domains with EQ-5D-5L: -0.78 to -0.55; discrimination between active disease and remission, P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). The overall performance of instruments assessing function was low-to-moderate.

CONCLUSION

Among the 22 outcome measurement instruments used for AAV, BVAS (any version), VDI and AAV-PRO had the strongest psychometric properties.

Ultrasound and elastography in the assessment of skin involvement in systemic sclerosis: A systematic literature review focusing on validation and standardization - WSF Skin Ultrasound Group

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the published evidence in the literature on the role of ultrasound and elastography to assess skin involvement in systemic sclerosis (SSc).

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed within the "Skin Ultrasound Working Group" of the World Scleroderma Foundation, according to the Cochrane Handbook. A search was conducted in Pubmed, Cochrane Library and Embase databases from 1/1/1979 to 31/5/2021, using the participants, intervention, comparator and outcomes (PICO) framework. Only full-text articles involving adults, reported in any language, assessing ultrasound to quantify skin pathology in SSc patients. Two reviewers performed the assessment of risk of bias, data extraction and synthesis, independently.

RESULTS

Forty-six studies out of 3248 references evaluating skin ultrasound and elastography domains were included. B-mode ultrasound was used in 30 studies (65.2%), elastography in nine (19.6%), and both methods in seven (15.2%). The ultrasound outcome measure domains reported were thickness (57.8%) and echogenicity (17.2%); the elastography domain was stiffness (25%). Methods used for image acquisition and analysis were remarkably heterogeneous and frequently under-reported, precluding data synthesis across studies. The same applies to contextual factors and feasibility. Our data syntheses indicated evidence of good reliability and convergent validity for ultrasound thickness evaluation against mRSS and skin histological findings. Stiffness and echogenicity have limited evidence for validity against histological findings. Evidence for sensitivity to change, test-retest reliability, clinical trial discrimination or thresholds of meaning is limited or absent for reported ultrasound domains.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound is a valid and reliable tool for skin thickness measurement in SSc but there are significant knowledge gaps regarding skin echogenicity assessment by ultrasound and skin stiffness evaluation by elastography in terms of feasibility, validity and discrimination. Standardization of image acquisition and analysis is needed to foster progress.

Improving Assessment of Disease Severity and Strategies for Monitoring Progression in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy [AO Spine RECODE-DCM Research Priority Number 4]

STUDY DESIGN

Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVE

To (i) discuss why assessment and monitoring of disease progression is critical in Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM); (ii) outline the important features of an ideal assessment tool and (iii) discuss current and novel strategies for detecting subtle deterioration in DCM.

METHODS

Literature review.

RESULTS

Degenerative cervical myelopathy is an overarching term used to describe progressive injury to the cervical spinal cord by age-related changes of the spinal axis. Based on a study by Smith et al (2020), the prevalence of DCM is approximately 2.3% and is expected to rise as the global population ages. Given the global impact of this disease, it is essential to address important knowledge gaps and prioritize areas for future investigation. As part of the AO Spine RECODE-DCM (Research Objectives and Common Data Elements for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy) project, a priority setting partnership was initiated to increase research efficiency by identifying the top ten research priorities for DCM. One of the top ten priorities for future DCM research was: What assessment tools can be used to evaluate functional impairment, disability and quality of life in people with DCM? What instruments, tools or methods can be used or developed to monitor people with DCM for disease progression or improvement either before or after surgical treatment?

CONCLUSIONS

With the increasing prevalence of DCM, effective surveillance of this population will require both the implementation of a monitoring framework as well as the development of new assessment tools.

Test-retest reliability of outcome measures: data from three trials in radiographic and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis

Objectives

Aim of this study was to assess test–retest reliability of candidate instruments for the mandatory domains of the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis international Society (ASAS)-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology core set for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

Methods

Screening and baseline data from COAST-V, COAST-X and RAPID-axSpA was used to evaluate test–retest reliability of each candidate instrument for the mandatory domains (disease activity, pain, morning stiffness, fatigue, physical function, overall functioning and health). A maximum time interval of 28 days between both visits was used for inclusion in this study. Test–retest reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Bland and Altman plots provided mean difference and 95% limits of agreement, which were used to calculate the smallest detectable change (SDC). Data were analysed for radiographic and non-radiographic axSpA separately.

Results

Good reliability was found for Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ICC 0.79, SDC 0.6), C reactive protein (ICC 0.72–0.79, SDC 12.3–17.0), Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (ICC 0.87, SDC 1.1) and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (ICC Physical Component Summary 0.81, SDC 4.7, Mental Component Summary 0.80, SDC 7.3). Moderate reliability was found for Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (ICC 0.72, SDC 1.1), patient global assessment (ICC 0.58, SDC 1.5), total back pain (ICC 0.64, SDC 1.3), back pain at night (ICC 0.67, SDC 1.3), morning stiffness (ICC 0.52–0.63, SDC 1.5–2.2), fatigue (ICC 0.65, SDC 1.3) and ASAS-Health Index (ICC 0.74, SDC 2.5). Reliability and SDC for the radiographic and non-radiographic axSpA subgroups were similar.

Conclusion

Overall reliability was good, and comparable levels of reliability were found for patients with radiographic and non-radiographic axSpA, even though most instruments were developed for radiographic axSpA. Composite measures showed higher reliability than single-item measures in assessing disease activity in patients with axSpA.

Outcome measurement instrument selection for lung physiology in systemic sclerosis associated interstitial lung disease: A systematic review using the OMERACT filter 2.1 process

OBJECTIVE

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) is a research organization focused on improving health care outcomes for patients with autoimmune and musculoskeletal diseases. The Connective Tissue Disease-Interstitial Lung Disease (CTD-ILD) Working Group on Lung Physiology is a group within OMERACT charged with identifying outcome measures that should be implemented in studies of patients with CTD-ILD. The OMERACT Filter 2.1 is an evidence-based algorithm used to identify outcome measures that are truthful, feasible, and able to discriminate between groups of interest. Our objective was to summate evidence (published literature, key opinion leader input, patient perspectives) that would influence the CTD-ILD Working Group's vote to accept or reject the use of two measures of lung physiology, the forced vital capacity (FVC) and the diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide (DLco) for use in randomized controlled trials (RTCs) and longitudinal observational studies (LOSs) involving patients with systemic sclerosis associated ILD (SSc-ILD).

METHODS

Patient Research Partners (those afflicted with SSc-ILD) and the CTD-ILD Working Group on Lung Physiology were polled to assess their opinion on the FVC and DLco in terms of feasibility; the CTD-ILD Working Group was also queried on these instruments' face and content validity. We then conducted a systematic literature review to identify articles in the SSc-ILD population that assessed the following measurement properties of FVC and DLco: (1) construct validity, (2) test-retest reliability, (3) longitudinal construct validity, (4) clinical trial discrimination/sensitivity to detect change in clinical trials, and (5) thresholds of meaning. Results were summarized in a Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) table for each instrument. OMERACT CTD-ILD Working Group members discussed and voted on the strength of evidence supporting these two instruments and voted to endorse, provisionally endorse, or not endorse either instrument.

RESULTS

Forty Patient Research Partners reported these two measures are feasible (are not an unnecessary burden or represent an infeasible longitudinal assessment of their disease). A majority of the 18 CTD-ILD Working Group members voted that both the FVC and DLco are feasible and have face and content validity. The systematic literature review returned 1,447 non-duplicated articles, of which 177 met eligibility for full text review. Forty-eight studies (13 RCTs, 35 LOSs) were included in the qualitative analysis. The FVC SOMP table revealed high quality, consistent data with evidence of good performance for all five measurement properties, suggesting requisite published evidence to proceed with endorsement. The DLco SOMP table showed a lack of data to support test-retest reliability and inadequate evidence to support clinical trial discrimination. There was unanimous agreement (15 [100%]) among voting CTD-ILD Working Group members to endorse the FVC as an instrument for lung physiology in RCTs and LOSs in SSc-ILD. Based on currently available evidence, DLco did not meet the OMERACT criteria and is not recommended for use in RCTs to represent lung physiology of SSc-ILD. The OMERACT Technical Advisory Group agreed with these decisions.

CONCLUSION

The OMERACT Filter 2.1 was successfully applied to the domain of lung physiology in patients with SSc-ILD. The FVC was endorsed for use in RCTs and LOSs based on the Working Group's vote; DLco was not endorsed.

Development of an extension of the OMERACT Summary of Measurement Properties table to capture equity considerations: SOMP-Equity

OBJECTIVE

To develop an equity extension of the OMERACT Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) Table, SOMP Equity to describe whether a patient reported outcome measure (PROM) works well among patients of diverse languages and cultures, education levels, and other population characteristics.

METHODS

We used the PROGRESS-Plus framework to categorize equity characteristics assessed in trials of PROM. PROGRESS refers to Place of residence, Race/ethnicity/culture/language, Occupation, Gender/sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, and Social Capital, while the 'plus' captures additional characteristics, such as age. We pilot tested our SOMP Equity Extension using the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) as a prototypical PROM.

RESULTS

The SOMP Equity Extension retains the same columns as the original OMERACT SOMP (domain match, feasibility, construct validity, test-retest reliability, longitudinal construct validity, clinical trial discrimination, thresholds of meaning) but uses the PROGRESS-Plus characteristics as rows. We found several examples of studies of the HAQ which had assessed one or more PROGRESS-Plus characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The most commonly reported equity considerations were related to language. OMERACT Equity virtual meeting participants were polled and they indicated that the SOMP Equity Extension is useful for highlighting and tracking equity considerations for OMERACT Core Outcome Measurement Instruments.

International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM): Report from the 2020 Annual Meeting

BACKGROUND

The International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM) initiative is a non-profit organization that aims to develop evidence-based outcome measurements to evaluate the impact of treatments for patients with dermatological disease. IDEOM includes all key stakeholders in dermatology (patient, physician, industry, insurer, and government) during the process of developing such outcome measurements.

SUMMARY

Here, we provide an update of IDEOM activities that were presented at the 2020 IDEOM Virtual Annual Meeting (October 23-24, 2020). During the meeting, multiple IDEOM workgroups (psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, hidradenitis suppurativa, acne, pyoderma gangrenosum, and actinic keratosis) shared their progress to date, as well as future directions in developing and validating Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Updates on demonstrating efficacy in clinicals trials by the US Food and Drug Administration are also summarized. Key Messages: In this report, we summarize the work presented by each IDEOM workgroup (psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, hidradenitis suppurativa, acne, pyoderma gangrenosum, and actinic keratosis) at the 2020 IDEOM Virtual Annual Meeting.

Core outcome measurement instrument selection for physical function in hand osteoarthritis using the OMERACT Filter 2.1 process

OBJECTIVE

Physical function is one of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) core outcome domains for hand osteoarthritis studies. Our aim was to select appropriate instrument(s) to measure this domain, as part of the development of a core outcome measurement set.

METHODS

Following the OMERACT Filter 2.1 instrument selection process, the (function subscale of) the Australian/Canadian Hand Osteoarthritis Index (AUSCAN), Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis (FIHOA) and Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) were assessed for domain match, feasibility, truth and discrimination. Data gathered from available literature, working group and patient surveys, and additional analyses in two hand osteoarthritis cohorts were used to inform a consensus process. Results were summarized in Summary of Measurements Properties tables and reviewed by the OMERACT technical advisory group.

RESULTS

MHQ passed the assessment of domain match and feasibility by the working group and patient research partners. For AUSCAN important limitations in feasibility were noted, but domain match was good. FIHOA did not pass the assessment and was not taken through the follow-up assessment. Based on published literature, reliability and construct/longitudinal validity of both MHQ and AUSCAN fulfilled OMERACT standards. While clinical trial discrimination and thresholds of meaning were good for AUSCAN, results for MHQ were ambiguous.

CONCLUSION

MHQ was provisionally endorsed as OMERACT core outcome measure for the core domain physical function. While AUSCAN may have better metric properties than MHQ, it received provisional endorsement as a second measure of function due to important feasibility issues. A research agenda to merit full endorsement was set.

Assessing the Reliability of the OMERACT Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Scoring System for Temporomandibular Joints (JAMRIS-TMJ)

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) remains the most comprehensive modality to assess juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA)-related inflammation and osteochondral damage in the temporomandibular joints (TMJ). This study tested the reliability of a new JIA MRI scoring system for TMJ (JAMRIS-TMJ) and the impact of variations in calibration and reader specialty. Thirty-one MRI exams of bilateral TMJs were scored independently using the JAMRIS-TMJ by 20 readers consisting of radiologists and non-radiologist clinicians in three reading groups, with or without a calibrating atlas and/or tutorial. The inter-reader reliability in the multidisciplinary cohort assessed by the generalizability coefficient was 0.61–0.67 for the inflammatory and 0.66–0.74 for the damage domain. The atlas and tutorial did not improve agreement within radiologists, but improved the agreement between radiologist and non-radiologist groups. Agreements between different calibration levels were 0.02 to 0.08 lower by the generalizability coefficient compared to agreement within calibration levels; agreement between specialty groups was 0.04 to 0.10 lower than within specialty groups. Averaging two radiologists raised the reliability above 0.8 for both domains. Therefore, the reliability of JAMRIS-TMJ was moderate-to-good depending on the presence of specialty and calibration differences. The atlas and tutorial are necessary to improve reliability when the reader cohort consists of multiple specialties.

Improving domain definition and outcome instrument selection: Lessons learned for OMERACT from imaging

OBJECTIVES

Imaging is one of the most rapidly evolving fields in medicine. Unfortunately, many imaging technologies have been applied as measurement instruments without rigorous evaluation of the evidence supporting their truth, discriminatory capability and feasibility for that context of use. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1 Instrument Selection Algorithm (OFISA) is used to evaluate such evidence for use of an instrument in a research setting. The objectives of this work are to: [1] define and describe the key conceptual aspects that are essential for the evaluation of imaging as an outcome measurement instrument and [2] describe how these aspects can be assessed through OFISA.

METHODS

Experts in imaging and/or methodology met to formalize concepts and define key steps. These concepts were discussed with a team of patient research partners with interest in imaging to refine technical and methodological aspects into comprehensible information. A workshop was held at OMERACT2020 and feedback was incorporated into existing OMERACT process for domain and instrument selection.

RESULTS

Three key lessons were identified: (1) a clear definition of the domain we want to measure is a necessary prerequisite to the selection of a good instrument, (2) the sources of variability that can directly influence the instrument should be clearly identified, (3) incorporating these first two lessons into OFISA improves the quality of every instrument selection process.

CONCLUSIONS

The incorporation of these lessons in the updated OMERACT Filter (now 2.2) will improve the quality of the selection process for all types of outcome measurement instruments.

The evolution of instrument selection for inclusion in core outcome sets at OMERACT: Filter 2.2

INTRODUCTION

OMERACT uses an evidence-based framework known as the 'OMERACT Filter Instrument Selection Algorithm' (OFISA) to guide decisions in the assessment of outcome measurement instruments for inclusion in a core outcome set for interventional and observational clinical trials.

METHODS

A group of OMERACT imaging and patient-centered outcome methodologists worked with imaging outcome groups to facilitate the selection of imaging outcome measurement instruments using the OFISA approach. The lessons learned from this work influenced the evolution to Filter 2.2 and necessitated changes to OMERACT's documentation and processes.

RESULTS

OMERACT has revised documentation and processes to incorporate the evolution of instrument selection to Filter 2.2. These revisions include creation of a template for detailed definitions of the target domain which is a necessary first step for instrument selection, modifications to the Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) table to account for sources of variability, and development of standardized reporting tables for each measurement property.

CONCLUSIONS

OMERACT Filter 2.2 represents additional modifications of the OMERACT guide for working groups in their rigorous assessment of measurement properties of instruments of various types, including imaging outcome measurement instruments. Enhanced reporting aims to increase the transparency of the evidence base leading to judgements for the endorsement of instruments in core outcome sets.

OMERACT Filter 2.1 Instrument Selection for Physical Function Domain in Psoriatic Arthritis: Provisional Endorsement for HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF

OBJECTIVES

Physical function is one of the core domains to be measured in all trials in psoriatic arthritis (PsA). We aimed to evaluate two instruments for physical function in PsA: The Health Assessment Questionnaire-disability index (HAQ-DI) and the physical functioning subscale of the Medical Outcome Survey Short-Form 36 items (SF-36 PF).

METHODS

We followed guidelines set out by the OMERACT Filter 2.1. A working group was formed to evaluate each instrument for domain match and feasibility to reach consensus. Two systematic literature reviews (SLRs) were conducted to identify the relevant articles supporting measurement properties of both instruments. Five additional measurement properties were appraised: construct validity, test-retest reliability, longitudinal construct validity, clinical trial discrimination, and threshold of meaning. New evidence was synthesized to fill the gap. Data were presented to the OMERACT technical advisory group (TAG) and the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) community for endorsement.

RESULTS

The results for seven measurement properties for HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF were presented in Summary of Measurement Property (SOMP) tables. The working group proposed "Provisional Endorsement" for both instruments. The body of evidence was approved by the OMERACT TAG. In two Delphi exercises among GRAPPA members, HAQ-DI received 93.9% and 97.5% endorsement votes, while that for SF-36 PF were 86.7% and 77.3%.

CONCLUSION

Both HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF were provisionally endorsed for the measurement of physical function in PsA trials, using the OMERACT Filter 2.1.

Joint and entheseal inflammation in the knee region in spondyloarthritis - reliability and responsiveness of two OMERACT whole-body MRI scores

OBJECTIVE

To perform region-based development of whole-body MRI through validation of knee region scoring systems in spondyloarthritis (SpA).

METHODS

Assessment of knee inflammatory pathologies using 2 systems, OMERACT MRI Whole-body score for Inflammation in Peripheral joints and Entheses (MRI-WIPE) and Knee Inflammation MRI Scoring System (KIMRISS), in 4 iterative multi-reader exercises.

RESULTS

In the final exercise, reliability was mostly good for readers with highest agreement in previous exercise. Median pairwise single-measure ICCs for osteitis and synovitis/effusion status/change were 0.71/0.48 (WIPE-osteitis), 0.48/0.77 (WIPE-synovitis/effusion), 0.59/0.91 (KIMRISS-osteitis) and 0.92/0.97 (KIMRISS-synovitis/effusion). SRMs were 0.74 (WIPE-synovitis/effusion) and 0.78 (KIMRISS-synovitis/effusion).

CONCLUSION

MRI-WIPE and KIMRISS may both be useful in SpA whole-body evaluation studies.

OMERACT definition and reliability assessment of chronic ultrasound lesions of the axillary artery in giant cell arteritis

OBJECTIVES

To define chronic ultrasound lesions of the axillary artery (AA) in long-standing giant cell arteritis (GCA) and to evaluate the reliability of the new ultrasound definition in a web-based exercise.

METHODS

A structured Delphi, involving an expert panel of the Large Vessel Vasculitis subgroup of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Ultrasound Working Group was carried out. The reliability of the new definition was tested in a 2-round web-based exercise involving 23 experts and using 50 still images each from AA of long-standing and acute GCA patients, as well as 50 images from healthy individuals.

RESULTS

The final OMERACT ultrasound definition of chronic changes was based on measurement and appearance of the intima-media complex. The overall reliability of the new definition for chronic ultrasound changes in longstanding GCA of the AA was good to excellent with Light's kappa values of 0.79-0.80 for inter-reader reliability and mean Light's-kappa of 0.88 for intra-reader reliability. The mean inter-rater and intra-rater agreements were 86-87% and 92%, respectively. Good reliabilities were observed comparing the vessels with longstanding versus acute GCA with a mean agreement and kappa values of 81% and 0.63, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The new OMERACT ultrasound definition for chronic vasculitis of the AA in GCA revealed a good to excellent inter- and intra-reader reliability in a web-based exercise of experts.

Test-retest Reliability for HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF for the Measurement of Physical Function in Psoriatic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

Due to no existing data, we aimed to derive evidence to support test-retest reliability for the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and 36-item Short Form Health Survey physical functioning domain (SF-36 PF) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

We identified datasets that collected relevant data for test-retest reliability for HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF, and evaluated them using Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1 methodology. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) as a measure of test-retest reliability. We then conducted a quality assessment and evaluated the adequacy of test-retest reliability performance.

RESULTS

Two datasets were identified for HAQ-DI and 1 for SF-36 PF in PsA. The quality of the datasets was good. The ICCs for HAQ-DI were good and excellent in study 1 (0.90, 95% CI 0.79-0.95) and study 2 (0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.97). The ICC for SF-36 PF was excellent (0.96, 95% CI 0.92-0.98). The performance of test-retest reliability for both instruments was judged to be adequate.

CONCLUSION

The new data derived support good and reasonable test-retest reliability for HAQ-DI and SF-36 PF in PsA.

Diagnosis, classification, and assessment in psoriatic arthritis

There have been considerable advances in the classification and assessment of psoriatic arthritis (PsA). In this report, we give an overview of historic and current classification criteria and discuss its role and limitations in research and clinical practice. We discuss the most commonly used assessment instruments for arthritis, psoriasis, onychodystrophy, enthesitis, dactylitis and axial PsA with a focus on clinical practice. We pay particular attention to the current evidence for the use of composite outcome measures, and their use in randomised controlled trials and routine care.

OMERACT consensus-based operational definition of contextual factors in rheumatology clinical trials: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVES

To develop an operational definition of contextual factors (CF) [1].

METHODS

Based on previously conducted interviews, we presented three CF types in a Delphi survey; Effect Modifying -, Outcome Influencing - and Measurement Affecting CFs. Subsequently, a virtual Special Interest Group (SIG) session was held for in depth discussion of Effect Modifying CFs.

RESULTS

Of 161 Delphi participants, 129 (80%) completed both rounds. After two rounds, we reached consensus (≥70% agreeing) for all but two statements. The 45 SIG participants were broadly supportive.

CONCLUSION

Through consensus we developed an operational definition of CFs, which was well received by OMERACT members.

Comparing the Patient-Reported Physical Function Outcome Measures in a Real-Life International Cohort of Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the psychometric properties of 3 patient-reported outcome measures to assess the physical function in psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

METHODS

Data were available for the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index (HAQ DI), the 12-item Short Form instrument physical component summary (SF-12 PCS), and the Psoriatic Arthritis Impact of Disease instrument functional capacity score (PsAID-FC). Data came from a longitudinal study in 14 countries of consecutive adults with definite PsA with ≥2 years of duration. The score distribution, construct validity, responsiveness, and thresholds of meaning of the patient-reported outcome measures were evaluated.

RESULTS

At baseline, 414 subjects (52% male) were analyzed. The mean ± SD age was 52.4 ± 12.5 years and duration of illness was 10.9 ± 8.1 years. Ceiling effects were noted in 31% and 21% of patients for HAQ DI and PsAID-FC, respectively; floor effects were minimal. All 3 patient-reported outcome measures met a priori hypotheses for construct validity. After a median follow-up of 4.1 (interquartile range 2.7) months in 350 patients, 27%, 54%, and 18% of patients reported themselves improved, not changed, and worsened, respectively. Change scores were statistically different for groups for worsening versus no-change for all patient-reported outcome measures. PsAID-FC was more sensitive to change than the other 2 patient-reported outcome measures. Comparing groups with worsening condition to no-change, the standardized response mean square ratios were HAQ DI 29.9, SF-12 PCS 16.7, and PsAID-FC 40.1.

CONCLUSION

HAQ DI, SF-12 PCS, and PsAID-FC are valid measures of physical function for PsA. PsAID-FC, a single question, performed similarly to the other patient-reported outcome measures and may be an additional option to measure PsA-specific physical function.

Relevant domains and outcome measurement instruments in Neuropsychiatric Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVES

Although neuropsychiatric involvement in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (NPSLE) is one of the most complex and troubling manifestations of the disease, validated outcome instruments to be used as sensitive endpoints in controlled clinical trials are lacking. We set out a systematic literature review (SLR) to identify outcome measurement instruments and domains used to assess NPSLE.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for systematic reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were used. Articles available in English (1967-2020), listed in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and EULAR outcome measures library were screened. All domains and outcome measurement instruments were characterized according to the OMERACT Filter 2.1, considering core areas (manifestations/abnormalities, life impact, death/lifespan, societal/resource use) and contextual factors.

RESULTS

Of 3,392 abstracts evaluated, 83 studies were included in the SLR (15,974 patients, females 89.9%). Eligible studies included domains and instruments pertinent to all core areas defined by OMERACT, except for "societal/resource use". The most common core areas were "manifestations/abnormalities", covering 10 domains pertinent to laboratory and instrumental markers, indexes and neuropsychiatric dimension (cognitive, neurologic and psychiatric field), and "life impact", covering 7 domains related to physical function (from both the perspective of the patient and the physician), pain and quality of life.

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed great heterogeneity in the instruments derived from populations with NPSLE and none of these had high-quality evidence. This supports the need to develop and further validate a core domain set and outcome measurement instruments to promote clinical research in this field, enhancing comparability across studies.

Endorsement of the domains of knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) flare: A report from the OMERACT 2020 inaugural virtual consensus vote from the flares in OA working group

OBJECTIVE

Towards developing an instrument to measure knee and hip osteoarthritis (KHOA) flare, the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Flares in OA Working Group first sought to identify and define relevant domains of flare in KHOA.

METHODS

Guided by OMERACT Filter 2.1, candidate domains were identified from data generated in interviews, in English or French, with persons with KHOA and health professionals (HPs) who treat OA. The first and second rounds of an online Delphi process with patients and HPs, including researchers, selected relevant domains. The third round provided agreement on the selected domains and their definitions. At the virtual OMERACT 2020 workshop, the proposed domains and their definitions were discussed in facilitated breakout groups with patients and HPs. Participants then voted, with consensus set at ≥70%.

RESULTS

Qualitative interviews characterizing OA flare were completed with 29 persons with KHOA and 16 HPs. Content was analyzed and grouped into nine clusters. These candidate domains were included in two Delphi rounds, completed by 91 patients and 165 HPs then 50 patients and 116 HPs, per round, respectively. This resulted in selecting five relevant domains. A final Delphi round, completed by 38 patients and 89 HPs, provided agreement on these domains and their definitions. The OMERACT virtual vote included 27 patients and 106 HPs. The domains and their definitions were endorsed with ≥98% agreement. Domains include: Pain, Swelling, Stiffness, Psychological aspects, and Impact of symptoms, all defined "during flare".

CONCLUSION

Using OMERACT methodology, we have developed five domains of KHOA flare that were highly endorsed by patients and HPs.

Measurement properties of radiographic outcome measures in Psoriatic Arthritis: A systematic review from the GRAPPA-OMERACT initiative

BACKGROUND

Structural damage is as an important outcome in the Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) Core Domain Set and its assessment is recommended at least once in the development of a new drug.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review (SR) to identify studies addressing the measurement properties of radiographic outcome instruments for structural damage in PsA and appraise the evidence through the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.1 Framework Instrument Selection Algorithm (OFISA).

METHODS

A SR was conducted using search strategies in EMBASE and MEDLINE to identify full-text English studies which aimed to develop or assess the measurement properties of radiographic outcome instruments in PsA. Determination of eligibility and data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers with input from a third to achieve consensus. Two reviewers assessed the methodology and results of eligible studies and synthesized the evidence using OMERACT methodology.

RESULTS

Twelve articles evaluating radiographic instruments were included. The articles assessed nine peripheral (hands, wrists and/or feet) and six axial (spinal and/or sacroiliac joints) radiographic instruments. The peripheral radiographic instruments with some evidence for reliability, cross-sectional construct validity and longitudinal construct validity were the Ratingen and modified Sharp van der Heijde scores. No instruments had evidence for clinical trial discrimination or thresholds of meaning. There was limited evidence for the measurement properties of all identified axial instruments.

CONCLUSION

There are significant knowledge gaps in the responsiveness of peripheral radiographic instruments. Axial radiographic instruments require further validation, and the need to generate novel instruments and utilise other imaging modalities should be considered.

Development and validation of an alternative ankylosing spondylitis disease activity score when patient global assessment is unavailable

Objective

To develop an alternative Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) to be used in research settings in axial SpA (axSpA) when Patient Global Assessment (PGA) is unavailable in databases.

Methods

Longitudinal data from four axSpA cohorts and two randomized controlled trials were combined. Observations were randomly split in a development (N = 1026) and a validation cohort (N = 1059). Substitutes of PGA by BASDAI total score, single or combined individual BASDAI questions, and a constant value, were established in the development cohort. Conversion factors for each substitute were defined by Generalized Estimating Equations, obtaining seven ‘alternative’ formulae. Validation was performed in the validation cohort according to the OMERACT filter, taking into consideration: (i) truth (agreement with original-ASDAS in the continuous score, by intraclass correlation coefficient and in disease activity states, by weighted kappa); (ii) discrimination [standardized mean difference of ASDAS scores between high/low disease activity states defined by external anchors, e.g. Patient Acceptable Symptom State; agreement (kappa) in the percentage of patients reaching ASDAS improvement criteria according to alternative vs original formulae]; and (iii) feasibility.

Results

Comparing various options, alternative-ASDAS using BASDAI total as PGA replacement proved to be: truthful (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.98, kappa = 0.90), discriminative [ASDAS scores between Patient Acceptable Symptom State no/yes: standardized mean difference = 1.37 (original-ASDAS standardized mean difference = 1.43); agreement with original-ASDAS in major improvement/clinically important improvement criteria: kappa = 0.93/0.88] and feasible (BASDAI total often available, as questions required for the ASDAS; conversion coefficient ≈ 1).

Conclusion

Alternative-ASDAS using BASDAI total score as PGA replacement is the most truthful, discriminative and feasible instrument.

Use of Physician Global Assessment in systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review of its psychometric properties

OBJECTIVE

The Physician Global Assessment (PGA) is a visual analogue score that reflects the clinician's judgement of overall SLE disease activity. The aim of this systematic literature review is to describe and analyse the psychometric properties of the PGA.

METHODS

This systematic literature review was conducted by two independent reviewers in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. All articles published through 1 July 2019 in PubMed were screened, with no limitation on year of publication, language or patients' age. Psychometric properties data were analysed according to the OMERACT Filter methodology version 2.1.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 91 studies. Face validity was reported in all the articles retrieved in which the PGA was used alone or as part of composite indices (Systemic Responder Index, Safety of Estrogen in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment Flare Index, Lupus Low Disease Activity State, Definitions of Remission in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus criteria). Content validity was reported in 89 studies. Construct validity was demonstrated by a good correlation (r ≥ 0.50) between the PGA with the SLEDAI (12 studies), SLAM (4 studies), LAI, BILAG and ECLAM (2 studies each). Criterion validity was assessed exploring the PGA correlation with quality of life measurements, biomarker levels and treatment changes in 28 studies, while no study has evaluated correlation with damage. A good responsiveness for PGA was shown in eight studies. A high variability in scales was found, causing a wide range of reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.67-0.98).

CONCLUSION

PGA is a valid, responsive and feasible instrument, though its reliability was impacted by the scale adopted, suggesting the major need for standardization of its scoring.

Conventional ultrasound and elastography as imaging outcome tools in autoimmune myositis: A systematic review by the OMERACT ultrasound group

AIMS

To analyze whether there is sufficient data from published literature to demonstrate that ultrasound, including elastography, present good metric properties (truth, discrimination and feasibility) in autoimmune myositis (AIM).

METHODS

A population, intervention, comparator and outcome-structured (PICO) search was performed in Medline, Cochrane Library and Embase database from 01/01/1973 to 08/05/2019. The inclusion criteria required original research involving adult humans, reported in English, assessing ultrasound and elastography in patients with an AIM. Conference abstracts and computer-assisted diagnostics that focused on technique and not ultrasound domains were excluded.

RESULTS

Approximately 2670 articles were identified. Forty-one full-text articles were included in the final analysis. There were 551 AIM patients studied. Eighteen studies (43.9%) had a control group, of which 15 (63.3%) were healthy controls. The age of participants (including controls) varied from 18 to 86 years, and most were females (59%). Diagnosis of AIM was largely biopsy-proven, although some were derived through clinical presentation, positive clinical imaging (ultrasound or otherwise) and/or electromyography and steroid responsiveness. The features examined with ultrasound in the 41 included articles consisted of: muscle echogenicity, bulk, atrophy, architecture, power Doppler, perfusion characteristics, shear wave modulus, shear wave velocity, elasticity index and fasciculations. Twelve studies (29.2%) used quantitative methods to assess these characteristics, whilst others used semi-quantitative, dichotomous/binary and descriptive scoring systems. Criterion validity was met in 14 studies (12/14, 85.7%) and construct validity in 22 studies (22/25, 88.0%). Most published articles reported Level 3b to Level 5 evidence with varying degrees of bias. There was only one longitudinal study examining discrimination. Reliability and feasibility were under-reported.

CONCLUSION

This is the first systematic review studying the utility of ultrasound, including elastography, in AIM. There is some evidence for criterion and construct validity, suggesting that ultrasound may be a promising outcome measurement instrument in AIM. Agreement on the standardization of acquisition, and the definitions of target domains, is required. Additionally, further validation studies are required to determine discrimination, reliability and feasibility.