ReviewRheumatology advances in practice2023
Inequity in exercise-based interventions for adults with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review.
Review in Rheumatology advances in practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Physical activity in rheumatoid arthritis-is it time to push the pace of change?Rheumatology advances in practice · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This systematic review describes the extent to which PROGRESS-Plus equity factors were considered in the eligibility criteria of trials of exercise interventions for adults with RA. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for published (Cinahl, Embase, Medline, Physiotherapy Evidence Database), unpublished (Opengrey) and registered ongoing (International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number registry) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise interventions for adults with RA. Two authors independently performed study selection and quality assessment (Cochrane risk of bias tool). Results: A total of 9696 records were identified. After screening, 50 trials were included. All trials had either some concerns or high risk of bias and reported at least one PROGRESS-Plus equity factor within the eligibility criteria; this included place of residence, personal characteristics (age and disability), language, sex, social capital, time-dependent factors or features of relationship factors. Where reported, this equated to exclusion of 457 of 1337 potential participants (34%) based on equity factors. Conclusion: This review identified the exclusion of potential participants within exercise-based interventions for people with RA based on equity factors that might affect health-care opportunities and outcomes. This limits the generalizability of results, and yet this evidence is used to inform management and service design. Trials need to optimize participation, particularly for people with cardiovascular conditions, older adults and those with cognitive impairments. Reasons for exclusions need to be justified. Further research needs to address health inequalities to improve treatment accessibility and the generalizability of research findings. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021260941.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.