ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2025
Enhancing current guidance for psoriatic arthritis and its comorbidities: recommendations from an expert consensus panel.
Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research trends and priorities in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis from 2014 to 2024: A bibliometric and visualization study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Cross-speciality collaborative care in complex immune-mediated inflammatory diseases: treating the person living with the condition.BMC medicine · 2025Review
- European advances in digital rheumatology: explainable insights and personalized digital health tools for psoriatic arthritis.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Review
- Obesity mediates the association between psoriasis and diabetes incidence: a population-based study.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
- High persistence of biologic therapy in patients with Psoriatic arthritis: a real-world evidence from a high-complexity hospital in Colombia.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe existing guidelines for PsA cover many aspects of management. Some gaps remain relating to routine practice application. An expert group aimed to enhance the current guidance and develop recommendations for clinical practice that are complementary to the existing guidelines.
methodsA steering committee comprising experienced, research-active clinicians in rheumatology, dermatology and primary care agreed on themes and relevant questions. A targeted literature review of PubMed and Embase following a PICO framework was conducted. At a second meeting, recommendations were drafted, and subsequently an extended faculty comprising rheumatologists, dermatologists, primary care clinicians, specialist nurses, allied health professionals, non-clinical academic participants and members of the Brit-PACT patient group, was recruited. Consensus was achieved via an online voting platform at which 75% of respondents agreed in the range of 7-9 on a 9-point scale.
resultsThe guidance comprised 34 statements covering four PsA themes. Diagnosis focused on strategies for identifying PsA early and referring appropriately, assessment of diagnostic indicators, use of screening tools and use of imaging. Disease assessment centred on holistic consideration of disease activity, physical functioning and impact from a patient perspective, and on how to implement shared decision-making. For comorbidities, recommendations included specific guidance on high-impact conditions such as depression and obesity. Management statements (which excluded extant guidance on pharmacological therapies) recommended multidisciplinary team working, implementation of lifestyle modifications and treat-to-target strategies. Minimizing CS use was recommended where feasible.
conclusionThe consensus group have made evidence-based best-practice recommendations for the management of PsA to enhance the existing guidelines.
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.