ArticleJAMIA open2026
Assessing data quality of rheumatoid and psoriatic arthritis patients in the
Article in JAMIA open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessing data quality of inflammatory bowel disease patients in theJAMIA open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Rheumatoid and Psoriatic Arthritis (RA and PsA) are autoimmune diseases that cause debilitating joint pain. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are recommended for the treatment of both conditions. However, real-world evidence studies would help characterize compliance with these recommendations. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model (OMOP CDM) standardizes electronic health record (EHR) data, allowing for research that incorporates multiple data sources. We are interested in determining whether OMOP CDM data on RA and PsA are fit-for-use. Methods: We selected diagnosis codes for RA and PsA that were the basis for each phenotype. We used a data quality checklist to evaluate 5 domains systematically: conformance, completeness, concordance, plausibility, and temporality. Results: Most phenotype-defining ICD source codes mapped to SNOMED. Both cohorts had low concept prevalences. Most concept correlations were weak (ρ ≤ 0.5). The relative distribution of DMARD ingredients in both cohorts was consistent with prior studies. The proportion of the RA and PsA cohorts that had data for timing between event calculations ranged from 13% to 85% and 16% to 81%, respectively. Despite variability in concept sequence analysis, symptomatic treatment concepts for RA and PsA were preceded by rheumatoid factor concepts, followed by DMARD therapy and disease diagnosis concepts. Conclusion: We have shown a novel implementation of our data quality framework on autoimmune disease cohorts.
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.