Rheumatology 2001; 40: 896-906
© 2001 British Society for Rheumatology
Report |
Outcome measures and classification criteria for the rheumatic diseases. A compilation of data from OMERACT (Outcome Measures for Arthritis Clinical Trials), ILAR (International League of Associations for Rheumatology), regional leagues and other groups
The University of Queensland, Edith Cavell Building, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Herston, Queensland 4029, Australia and
1 Division of Rheumatology and Immunology, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The International League of Associations for Rheumatology (ILAR) has been meeting with the World Health Organization (WHO) on a regular basis to discuss issues of mutual interest. Over the last few years these meetings have focused on the development of outcome measures in the rheumatic diseases, principally driven through OMERACT (Outcome Measures for Arthritis Clinical Trials). OMERACT has now held five meetings addressing a number of important areas in rheumatology, including clinical and imaging outcome measures, health economics and drug safety. The advantage of the WHO/ILAR Task Force Meeting has been to ratify these measures and allow them to be promulgated widely around the world.
This paper summarizes discussions which took place at the Sixth Joint WHO/ILAR Task Force Meeting on Rheumatic Diseases which was held in Geneva on 16 January 2000. This meeting reviewed a number of outcome measures for rheumatic diseases that had been developed over the past few years under the aegis of OMERACT. The WHO/ILAR meeting formally endorsed these outcome measures and acknowledged them as the gold standard for outcome measures in these conditions.
At the same meeting, a series of criteria for the classification of rheumatic diseases was also reviewed. These criteria have also been established through discussion by a number of different organizations, including ILAR, the American College of Rheumatology and EULAR (the European League of Associations for Rheumatology). These classification criteria have been put together by experts and have been adopted widely throughout the world. The meeting recommended that WHO/ILAR adopt these well-recognized classification criteria and encourage their use in clinical and epidemiological studies. It should be noted that classification criteria should not be used as diagnostic criteria but for the purposes of classifying patients in studies. An understanding of this concept will help in the interpretation of many clinical studies.
| Outcome measures for rheumatoid arthritis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The outcome measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials were developed at OMERACT 1 [1] and are very similar to those developed by the ACR [2]. The recommendations for the preliminary core set were:
- acute-phase reactants
- disability
- joint pain/tenderness
- joint swelling
- pain
- patient global assessment
- physician global assessment
- radiographs for studies of 1 yr or longer.
- disability
| Outcome measures for osteoarthritis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
These outcome measures for future phase III clinical studies in hip, knee and hand osteoarthritis were developed at OMERACT 3 and were published in the Journal of Rheumatology [3]. The core set of outcome measures in osteoarthritis should be:
- pain
- physical function
- patient global assessment
- joint imaging (using standardized methods for taking and rating radiographs, or any demonstrably superior imaging technique) for studies of 1 yr or longer.
- physical function
Quality of life and/or utility measures are also strongly recommended, but further work should be carried out to assess the usefulness of biological markers, stiffness, measures of inflammation and other assessments such as performance-based measures, time to surgery, flares or analgesic consumption before they are accepted as core measures.
| Outcome measures for ankylosing spondylitis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This core set of endpoints in ankylosing spondylitis clinical trials was developed at OMERACT 4 and published in the Journal of Rheumatology [4]. Defined core sets have been developed for use in four settings: disease-controlling anti-rheumatic therapy (DC-ART), symptom-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (SM-ARD) and physical therapy, and for clinical record keeping. These are as follows:
SM-ARD and physical therapy
- physical function
- spinal stiffness
- patient global assessment
- spinal mobility and pain
- spinal stiffness
Clinical record keeping
- add acute-phase reactants and peripheral joints/ entheses
DC-ART
- add fatigue
- hip radiograph
- spine radiograph.
- hip radiograph
| Outcomes measures for systemic lupus erythematosus |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A core set of outcome measures and response criteria were developed during OMERACT 4 and published in the Journal of Rheumatology [5, 6].
The core outcome domains to be measured in both randomized clinical trials and longitudinal observation studies in systemic lupus erythematosus are:
- disease activity
- health-related quality of life
- damage
- toxicity/adverse events.
- health-related quality of life
| Outcome measures for osteoporosis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The core endpoints for osteoporosis trials were discussed at OMERACT 3 and subsequently published in the Journal of Rheumatology [7].
The outcome measures for osteoporosis trials were discussed according to two broad groupings of trials: randomized trials where prevention of rapid bone loss was the primary aim and randomized trials where prevention of fractures may be a feasible outcome because patients were already at high risk of osteoporotic fractures either on the basis of low bone mass or previous osteoporotic fracture.
Randomized trials where prevention of rapid bone loss was the primary aim
Two core outcome measures of clinical benefit were considered appropriate:
- (a) bone minimum density (measured at two sites: the lumbar spine and proximal femur);
- (b) biochemical markers which should include at least one resorption marker (which should be based on a urinary cross-linked excretion) and at least one formation marker.
- (b) biochemical markers which should include at least one resorption marker (which should be based on a urinary cross-linked excretion) and at least one formation marker.
Non-core outcome measures of clinical benefit were considered to be:
- (a) fractures;
- (b) quality of life;
- (c) change in height (measured in a standardized manner).
- (b) quality of life;
Randomized trials of fracture prevention in high-risk populations
The core outcome measures of benefit were:
- (a) fracture;
- (b) hip and spine bone mineral density;
- (c) biochemical markers;
- (d) change in height.
- (b) hip and spine bone mineral density;
The non-core outcome measures of benefit in these studies would include:
- (a) quality of life instrument;
- (b) back pain measure;
- (c) economic evaluation, including health service utilization such as hospitalization, cotherapy, etc.;
- (d) measure of incident falls.
- (b) back pain measure;
It was recommended that these studies should be of 35 yr duration.
| Criteria for the classification of rheumatic diseases |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Ankylosing spondylitis
The 1961 Rome criteria for ankylosing spondylitis [8]
- Low back pain and stiffness for more than 3 months not relieved by rest;
- Pain and stiffness of the thoracic region;
- Limited motion in lumbar spine;
- Limited chest expansion;
- Evidence or history of iritis or its sequelae.
- Pain and stiffness of the thoracic region;
Requirements: either positive radiographs (bilateral SI) and one or more clinical criteria, or four out of five clinical criteria.
The 1966 New York criteria for ankylosing spondylitis [9]
- (1) Presence of history of pain at dorsolumbar junction or in lumbar spine;
- (2) Limitation of motion in anterior flexion, lateral flexion and extension;
- (3) Limitation of chest expansion to 1 inch (2.5 cm) or less at the fourth intercostal space.
- (2) Limitation of motion in anterior flexion, lateral flexion and extension;
Requirements: either positive radiographs (grade 34 bilateral sacroiliac) and one or more clinical criteria, or grade 34 unilateral or grade 2 bilateral SI with clinical criterion (2) or with clinical criteria (1) and (3).
The European Spondyloarthropathy Study Group classification for spondyloarthropathy [10]
- Inflammatory spinal pain
- or
- synovitis
- asymmetric
- predominantly in the lower limbs
- or
and one or more of the following:
- alternate buttock pain;
- sacroiliitis;
- enthesopathy;
- positive family history;
- psoriasis;
- inflammatory bowel disease;
- urethritis or cervicitis or acute diarrhoea occurring within 1 month before arthritis.
- sacroiliitis;
Domains of the core sets for SM-ARD/physical therapy, clinical record keeping and DC-ART as endorsed by Assessment in Ankylosing Spondylitis Working Group/OMERACT/ILAR [11]
Level 1, SM-ARD/physical therapy:
- physical function;
- pain;
- spinal mobility;
- spinal stiffness;
- patient global assessment.
- pain;
Level 2, Clinical record keeping:
- acute-phase reactants;
- peripheral joints/entheses.
- peripheral joints/entheses.
Level 3, DC-ART:
- spine radiograph;
- hip radiograph;
- fatigue.
- hip radiograph;
| Behçet's disease [12] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Findings applicable only in the absence of other clinical explanations.
| ChurgStrauss syndrome [13] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
aHistory of allergy, other than asthma or drug-related, is included only in the tree classification criteria set and not in the traditional format criteria set, which requires four or more of the six other items listed here.
| Fibromyalgia [14] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
History of widespread pain
Definition: Pain is considered widespread when all of the following are present: pain in the left side of the body, pain in the right side of the body, pain above the waist, and pain below the waist. In addition, axial skeletal pain (cervical spine or anterior chest or thoracic spine or low back) must be present. In this definition, shoulder and buttock pain is considered as pain for each involved. Low back pain is considered lower segment pain.
Pain in 11 of 18 tender point sites on digital palpation
Definition: Pain, on digital palpation, must be present in at least 11 of the following 18 tender point sites:
- occiputbilateral, at the suboccipital muscle insertions;
- low cervicalbilateral, at the anterior aspects of the intertransverse spaces at C5C7;
- trapeziusbilateral, at the midpoint of the upper border;
- supraspinatusbilateral, at origins, above the scapula spine near the medial border;
- second ribbilateral, at the second costochondral junctions, just lateral to the junctions on upper surfaces;
- lateral epicondylebilateral, 2 cm distal to the epicondyles;
- glutealbilateral, in upper outer quadrants of buttocks in anterior fold of muscle;
- kneebilateral, at the medial fat pad proximal to the joint line.
- low cervicalbilateral, at the anterior aspects of the intertransverse spaces at C5C7;
Digital palpation should be performed with an approximate force of 4 kg.
For a tender point to be considered positive the subject must state that the palpation was painful. Tender is not to be considered painful.
For classification purposes, patients will be said to have fibromyalgia if both criteria are satisfied. Widespread pain must have been present for at least 3 months. The presence of a second clinical disorder does not exclude the diagnosis of fibromyalgia.
| Giant cell arteritis [15] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The 1990 criteria for the classification of giant cell (temporal) arteritis (traditional format)
|
For the purposes of classification, a patient shall be said to have giant cell (temporal) arteritis if at least three of these five criteria are present. The presence of any three or more criteria yields a sensitivity of 93.5% and a specificity of 91.2%.
Criteria and definitions used for the classification of giant cell (temporal) arteritis (tree format)
|
aUsed as a surrogate if artery biopsy is not available [criterion (2)] or if temporal artery abnormality is not present [criterion (5)].
| Gout [16] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
- (a) The presence of characteristic urate crystals in the joint fluid, and/or
- (b) a tophus proved to contain urate crystals by chemical or polarized light microscopic means, and/or
- (c) the presence of six of the 12 clinical, laboratory, and X-ray phenomena listed below:
- (b) a tophus proved to contain urate crystals by chemical or polarized light microscopic means, and/or
maximum inflammation in 1 day;
- more than one attack;
- monoarticular arthritis;
- redness;
- first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTP) pain or swelling;
- unilateral first MTP;
- unilateral tarsal;
- suspected tophus;
- hyperuricaemia;
- asymmetric swelling;
- subcortical cysts, no erosions;
- negative organisms on culture.
- monoarticular arthritis;
| HenochSchönlein purpura [17] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The 1990 criteria for the classification of HenochSchönlein purpura (traditional format)
|
For the purposes of classification, a patient shall be said to have HenochSchönlein purpura if at least two of these four criteria are present. The presence of any two or more criteria yields a sensitivity of 87.1% and a specificity of 87.7%.
Criteria and definitions used for the classification of HenochSchönlein purpura (tree format)
|
| Hypersensitivity vasculitis [18] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The 1990 criteria for the classification of hypersensitivity vasculitis (traditional format)
|
For the purposes of classification, a patient shall be said to have hypersensitivity vasculitis if at least three of these five criteria are present. The presence of any three or more criteria yields a sensitivity of 71.0% and a specificity of 83.9%.
Criteria and definitions used for the classification of hypersensitivity vasculitis (tree format)
|
| Kawasaki syndrome [19] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Principal symptoms
Fever lasting from 1 to 2 weeks and not responding to antibiotics
Bilateral congestion of ocular conjunctivae
Changes in lips and oral cavity:
- dryness, redness and fissuring of lips;
- protuberance of tongue papillae (strawberry tongue);
- diffuse reddening of oral and pharyngeal mucosa.
- protuberance of tongue papillae (strawberry tongue);
Changes in peripheral extremities:
- reddening of palms and soles (initial stage);
- indurative oedema (initial stage);
- membranous desquamation from fingertips (convalescent stage).
- indurative oedema (initial stage);
Polymorphous exanthema of body trunk without vesicles or crusts
Acute non-purulent swelling of cervical lymph nodes of 1.5 cm or more in diameter
Other significant symptoms or findings
Carditis, especially myocarditis and pericarditis
Diarrhoea
Arthralgia or arthritis
Proteinuria and increase of leucocytes in urine sediment
Changes in blood tests:
- leucocytosis with shift to the left;
- slight decrease in erythrocyte and haemoglobin levels;
- increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate;
- positive C-reactive protein;
- increased
2-globulin;
- negative anti streptolysin-O titre
- slight decrease in erythrocyte and haemoglobin levels;
Changes occasionally observed:
- aseptic meningitis;
- mild jaundice or slight increase in serum transaminase
- mild jaundice or slight increase in serum transaminase
| Osteoarthritis of the hand [20] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Classification criteria for osteoarthritis of the hand (traditional format)
Hand pain, aching, or stiffness and three or four of the following features:
- hard tissue enlargement of two or more of 10 selected joints;
- hard tissue enlargement of two or more distal interphalangeal joints;
- fewer than three swollen metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints;
- deformity of at least one of 10 selected joints.
- hard tissue enlargement of two or more distal interphalangeal joints;
The 10 selected joints are the second and third distal interphalangeal, the second and third proximal interphalangeal (PIP), and the first carpometacarpal joints of both hands. This classification method yields a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 87%.
| Osteoarthritis of the hip [21] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Combined clinical (history, physical examination, laboratory) and radiographic classification criteria for osteoarthritis of the hip (traditional format)
Hip pain and
at least two of the following three features:
- erythrocyte sedimentation rate < 20 mm/h;
- radiographic femoral or acetabular osteophytes;
- radiographic joint space narrowing (superior, axial, and/or medial).
- radiographic femoral or acetabular osteophytes;
This classification method yields a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 91%.
Combined clinical (history, physical examination, laboratory) and radiographic classification criteria for osteoarthritis of the hip (classification tree format)
Hip pain and
Femoral and/or acetabular osteophytes on radiograph or
Erythrocyte sedimentation rate
20 mm/h and
Axial joint space narrowing on radiograph
This classification method yields a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 89%.
| Osteoarthritis of the knee [22] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Criteria for the classification of idiopathic osteoarthritis of the knee
|
ESR, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (Westergren); RF, rheumatoid factor; SF OA, synovial fluid signs of osteoarthritis (clear, viscous, or white blood cell count<2000/mm3).
aAn alternative for the clinical category would be four of six, which is 85% sensitive and 89% specific.
| Polyarteritis nodosa [23] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The 1990 criteria for the classification of polyarteritis nodosa (traditional format)
|
BUN, blood urea nitrogen; PMN, polymorphonuclear neutrophils.
For classification purposes, a patient shall be said to have polyarteritis nodosa if at least three of these 10 criteria are present. The presence of any three or more criteria yields a sensitivity of 82.2% and a specificity of 86.6%.
| Polymyalgia rheumatica [24] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Characteristics
Shoulder pain and/or stiffness bilaterally
Onset of illness of <2 weeks duration (refers to time taken for symptoms to reach their full-blown picture)
Initial erythrocyte sedimentation rate
40 mm/h
Morning stiffness duration >1 h
Age >65 yr
Depression and/or loss of weight
Upper arm tenderness bilaterally
| Polymyositis and dermatomyositis [25] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Criteria
- (1) Skin lesions:
- (a) heliotrope rash (red purple erythema on the upper palpebra);
- (b) Gottron's sign (red purple keratotic, atrophic erythema, or macules on the extensor surface of finger joints);
- (c) erythema on the extensor surface of extremity joints: slightly raised red purple erythema over elbows or knees.
- (b) Gottron's sign (red purple keratotic, atrophic erythema, or macules on the extensor surface of finger joints);
- (2) Proximal muscle weakness (upper or lower extremity and trunk).
- (3) Elevated serum creatine kinase or aldolase level.
- (4) Muscle pain on grasping or spontaneous pain.
- (5) Myogenic changes on EMG (short duration, polyphasic motor unit potentials with spontaneous fibrillation potentials).
- (6) Positive anti-Jo-1 (histadyl tRNA synthetase) antibody.
- (7) Non-destructive arthritis or arthralgias.
- (8) Systemic inflammatory signs (fever: more than 37°C at axilla, elevated serum C-reactive protein level or accelerated erythrocyte sedimentation rate of more than 20 mm/h by the Westergren method).
- (9) Pathological findings compatible with inflammatory myositis (inflammatory infiltration of skeletal muscle with degeneration or necrosis of muscle fibres; active phagocytosis, central nuclei, or evidence of active regeneration may be seen).
- (a) heliotrope rash (red purple erythema on the upper palpebra);
A patient is said to have dermatomyositis if at least one item from (1) and at least four items from (2) to (9) are present. The sensitivity is 94.1% (127/135), and the specificity of skin lesions against systemic lupus erythematosus and systemic sclerosis is 90.3% (214/237). A patient is said to have polymyositis if at least four items from (2) to (9) are present. The sensitivity is 98.9% (180/182) and the specificity of polymyositis and dermatomyositis against all control diseases combined is 95.2% (373/392).
| Reiter's syndrome [26] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Percentage sensitivity and specificity of various criteria for typical Reiter's syndrome (initial episode)
|
The numbers in parentheses indicate the number of patients correctly classified/the number tested.
| Rheumatic fever [27] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Guidelines for the diagnosis of an initial attack of rheumatic fever (Jones criteria, 1992 update)
Major manifestations
Carditis
Polyarthritis
Chorea
Erythema marginatum
Subcutaneous nodules
Minor manifestations
Clinical findings:
- arthralgia;
- fever.
- fever.
Laboratory findings:
- elevated acute-phase reactants
- erythrocyte sedimentation rate
- C-reactive protein
- prolonged PR interval
- erythrocyte sedimentation rate
Supporting evidence of antecedent group A streptococcal infections
Positive throat culture or rapid streptococcal antigen test
Elevated or rising streptococcal antibody titre
If supported by evidence of preceding group A streptococcal infection, the presence of two major manifestations or of one major and two minor manifestations indicates a high probability of acute rheumatic fever.
| Rheumatoid arthritis [28] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis (traditional format)
|
For classification purposes, a patient shall be said to have rheumatoid arthritis if he/she has satisfied at least four of these seven criteria. Criteria (1)(4) must have been present for at least 6 weeks. Patients with two clinical diagnoses are not excluded. Designation as classic, definite, or probable rheumatoid arthritis is not to be made.
| Sjögren's syndrome [29] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Preliminary criteria for the classification of Sjögren's syndrome
Ocular symptoms
Definition: a positive response to at least one of the following three questions:
- (a) Have you had daily, persistent, troublesome dry eyes for more than 3 months?
- (b) Do you have a recurrent sensation of sand or gravel in the eyes?
- (c) Do you use tear substitutes more than three times a day?
- (b) Do you have a recurrent sensation of sand or gravel in the eyes?
Oral symptoms
Definition: a positive response to at least one of the following three questions:
- (a) Have you had a daily feeling of dry mouth for more than 3 months?
- (b) Have you had recurrent or persistently swollen salivary glands as an adult?
- (c) Do you frequently drink liquids to aid in swallowing dry foods?
- (b) Have you had recurrent or persistently swollen salivary glands as an adult?
Ocular signs
Definition: objective evidence of ocular involvement, determined on the basis of a positive result on at least one of the following two tests:
- (a) Schirmer-1 test (
5 mm in 5 min);
- (b) Rose Bengal score (
4, according to the van Bijsterveld scoring system).
- (b) Rose Bengal score (
Histopathological features
Definition: focus score
1 on minor salivary gland biopsy (focus defined as an agglomeration of at least 50 mononuclear cells; focus score defined as the number of foci in 4 mm2 of glandular tissue).
Salivary gland involvement
Definition: objective evidence of salivary gland involvement, determined on the basis of a positive result on at least one of the following three tests:
- (a) Salivary scintigraphy;
- (b) Parotid sialography;
- (c) Unstimulated salivary flow (
1.5 ml in 15 min).
- (b) Parotid sialography;
Autoantibodies
Definition: presence of at least one of the following serum autoantibodies:
- (a) Antibodies to Ro/SS-A or La/SS-B antigens;
- (b) Antinuclear antibodies;
- (c) Rheumatoid factor.
- (b) Antinuclear antibodies;
Exclusion criteria: pre-existing lymphoma, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, sarcoidosis, or graft-vs-host disease.
| Spondyloarthropathies [30] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Inflammatory spinal pain or synovitis
asymmetric or predominantly
in the lower limbs
and one or more of the following:
- positive family history;
- psoriasis;
- inflammatory bowel disease;
- urethritis, cervicitis, or acute diarrhoea within 1 month before arthritis;
- buttock pain alternating between right and left gluteal areas;
- enthesopathy;
- sacroiliitis.
- psoriasis;
| Systemic lupus erythematosus [31, 32] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The 1982 revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus
|
The proposed classification is based on 11 criteria. For the purpose of identifying patients in clinical studies, a person shall be said to have systemic lupus erythematosus if any four or more of the 11 criteria are present, serially or simultaneously, during any interval of observation.
| Systemic sclerosis [33] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
American Rheumatism Association Scleroderma Criteria Cooperative Study (SCCS): preliminary clinical criteria for systemic sclerosis (excludes localized scleroderma and pseudosclerodermatous disorders)
Proximal scleroderma is the single major criterion; sensitivity was 91% and specificity was over 99%.
Sclerodactyly, digital pitting scars of fingertips or loss of substance of the distal finger pad, and bibasilar pulmonary fibrosis contributed further as minor criteria in the absence of proximal scleroderma.
One major or two or more minor criteria were found in 97% of definite systemic sclerosis patients, but only in 2% of the comparison patients with systemic lupus erythematosus, polymyositis/dermatomyositis, or Raynaud's phenomenon.
| Takayasu's arteritis [34] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The 1990 criteria for the classification of Takayasu's arteritis (traditional format)
|
For the purposes of classification, a patient shall be said to have Takayasu's arteritis if at least three of these six criteria are present. The presence of any three or more criteria yields a sensitivity of 90.5% and a specificity of 97.8%.
| Wegener's granulomatosis [35] |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The 1990 criteria for the classification of Wegener's granulomatosis (traditional format)
|
For the purposes of classification, a patient shall be said to have Wegener's granulomatosis if at least two of these four criteria are present. The presence of any two or more criteria yields a sensitivity of 88.2% and a specificity of 92.0%.
Criteria and definitions used for the classification of Wegener's granulomatosis (tree format)
|
aUsed as a surrogate if biopsy data are not available.
| Preliminary criteria for the classification of juvenile ideopathic arthritis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A proposal for the development of classification criteria for idiopathic arthritides in childhood had been drawn up by a Standing Committee of ILAR and published in the Journal of Rheumatology in 1995 [36]. These proposed classification criteria were then revised at a meeting in Durban in 1997 and again published in the Journal of Rheumatology in 1998 [37].
Classification of juvenile idiopathic arthritis
Systemic oligoarthritis:
- persistent
- extended
- extended
Polyarthritis (rheumatoid factor negative)
Polyarthritis (rheumatoid factor positive)
Psoriatic arthritis
Enthesitis-related arthritis
Other arthritis:
- fits no other category
- fits more than one category
- fits more than one category
| Notes |
|---|
Correspondence to: P. Brooks.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
- Tugwell P, Boers M. Developing consensus on preliminary core efficacy endpoints for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. J Rheumatol1993;20:5556.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Felson D, Anderson J, Boers M et al. Core set of disease activity measures for use in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum1993;36:72940.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Bellamy N, Kirwan J, Boers M et al. Recommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase III clinical trials in knee, hip and hand osteoarthritis. Consensus development at OMERACT 3. J Rheumatol1997;24:799802.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Van der Heijde DMFM, van der Linden SM, Dougados M, Bellamy N, Russell AS, Edmond JP. AS; plenary discussion and results of voting on selection of domains and some specific instruments. J Rheumatol1999;26:10035.[Medline]
- Strand V, Gladman D, Isenberg D, Petri M, Smolen J, Tugwell P. Outcome measures to be used in clinical trials in systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol1999;26:4907.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Smolen JS, Strand V, Cardiel M et al. Randomised clinical trials and longitudinal observation studies in systemic lupus erythematosus; consensus on a preliminary core set of outcome domains. J Rheumatol1999;26:5047.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Sambrook PM, Cummings SR, Eisman JA et al. Workshop report: guidelines for osteoporosis trials. J Rheumatol1997;24:12346.[Medline]
- Kellgren JH, Jeffrey MR, Ball J, eds. The epidemiology of chronic rheumatism, Vol. 1. Oxford: Blackwell, 1963:326.
- Bennett PH, Wood PHN, eds. Population studies of the rheumatic diseases. Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica, 1968:4567.
- Dougados M, van der Linden S, Juhlin R et al. The European Spondyloarthropathy Study Group preliminary criteria for the classification of spondyloarthropathy. Arthritis Rheum1991;34:121827.[Web of Science][Medline]
- van der Heijde D, van der Linden S, Dougados M, Bellamy N, Russell AS, Edmonds J. Ankylosing spondylitis: plenary discussion and results of voting on selection of domains and some specific instruments. J Rheumatol1999;26:10035.
- International Study Group for Behçet's Disease. Criteria for diagnosis of Behçet's Disease. Lancet1990;335:107880.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Masi AT, Hunder GG, Lie JT et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Churg-Strauss syndrome. Arthritis Rheum1990; 33:1094100.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Wolfe F, Smythe HA, Yunus MB et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia. Arthritis Rheum1990;30:16072.
- Hunder GG, Bloch DA, Michel BA et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of giant cell arteritis. Arthritis Rheum1990;33:11228.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Wallace SL, Robinson H, Masi AT et al. Preliminary criteria for the classification of the acute arthritis of primary gout. Arthritis Rheum1977;20:89590.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Mills JA, Michel BA, Bloch DA et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Henoch-Schönlein purpura. Arthritis Rheum1990;33:111421.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Calabrese LH, Michel BA, Bloch DA et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of hypersensitivity vasculitis. Arthritis Rheum1990; 33:110813.[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Kawasaki T, Kosaki T, Okawa S et al. A new infantile acute febrile mucocutaneous lymph node syndrome (MLNS) prevailing in Japan. Pediatrics1974;54:2716.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Altman R, Alarcon G, Appelrouth D et al. The American College of Rheumatology criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hand. Arthritis Rheum1990;33:160110.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Altman R, Alarcon G, Appelrouth D et al. The American College of Rheumatology criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hip. Arthritis Rheum1991;34:50514.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis: classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Arthritis Rheum1986;29:103949.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Lightfoot RW Jr, Michel BA, Bloch DA et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of polyarteritis nodosa. Arthritis Rheum1990;33:108893.[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Bird HA, Esselincks W, Dixon AJ et al. An evaluation of criteria for polymyalgia rheumatica. Ann Rheum Dis1979;38:4349.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Tanimoto K, Nakano K, Kano S et al. Classification criteria for polymyositis and dermatomyositis. J Rheumatol1995;22:66874.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Willkens RF, Arnett FC, Bitter T et al. Reiter's syndrome: evaluation of preliminary criteria for definite disease. Arthritis Rheum1981;24:8449.[Web of Science][Medline]
-
Special Writing Group of the Committee on Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis and Kawasaki Disease of the Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young of the American Heart Association. Guidelines for the diagnosis of rheumatic fever: Jones criteria, updated 1992. J Am Med Assoc1992;268:206973.
[Abstract/Free Full Text] - Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA et al. The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum1988;31:31524.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Vitali C, Bombardieri S, Moutsopoulos HM et al. Preliminary criteria for the classification of Sjögren's syndrome. Arthritis Rheum1993;36:3407.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Dougados M, van der Linden S, Juhlin R et al. The European Spondylarthropathy Study Group: preliminary criteria for the classification of spondylarthropathy. Arthritis Rheum1991;34:121827.
- Tan EM, Cohen AS, Fries JF et al. The 1982 revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Arthritis Rheum1982;25:12717.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Hochberg MC for the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American College of Rheumatology. Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus [Letter]. Arthritis Rheum1997;40:1725.
- Subcommittee for Scleroderma Criteria of the American Rheumatism Association Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee. Preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). Arthritis Rheum1980;23:58190.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Arend WP, Michel BA, Bloch DA et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Takayasu arteritis. Arthritis Rheum1990;33:112932.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Leavitt RY, Fauci AS, Bloch DA et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of Wegener's granulomatosis. Arthritis Rheum1990;33:11017.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Fink C and the Task Force for Classification Criteria. Proposal for the development of classification criteria for idiopathic arthritides of childhood. J Rheumatol1995;22:15669.[Web of Science][Medline]
- Petty RE, Southwood TR, Baum J et al. Revision of the proposed classification criteria for juvenile idiopathic arthritis: Durban,1997. J Rheumatol1998;25:19914.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. Castelnuovo, P. Cross, S. Mt-Isa, A. Spencer, M. Underwood, and on behalf of the TOIB study team Cost-effectiveness of advising the use of topical or oral ibuprofen for knee pain; the TOIB study [ISRCTN: 79353052] Rheumatology, July 1, 2008; 47(7): 1077 - 1081. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G Peat, E Thomas, R Duncan, L Wood, E Hay, and P Croft Clinical classification criteria for knee osteoarthritis: performance in the general population and primary care Ann Rheum Dis, October 1, 2006; 65(10): 1363 - 1367. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. L. Soeken, S. A. Miller, and E. Ernst Herbal medicines for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review Rheumatology, May 1, 2003; 42(5): 652 - 659. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. P Riemsma, E. Taal, J. R Kirwan, and J. J Rasker Patient education programmes for adults with rheumatoid arthritis BMJ, September 14, 2002; 325(7364): 558 - 559. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||


