ArticleRheumatology advances in practice2026
Unmet needs in patients with RA judged in remission by the rheumatologist: a semi-structured interview study.
Article in Rheumatology advances in practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To map unmet care needs in patients with RA who are in remission, investigate perceptions on the cause and impact of such needs and explore experiences and beliefs about suitable care strategies to address these issues. Methods: Individual in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted in patients with RA judged in remission by rheumatologists until data saturation. Qualitative data analysis was performed according to a guide, based on the constant comparative method. Results: Seventeen patient interviews were included for analysis. Patients identified a variety of persistent symptoms, like fatigue or anxiety, despite being judged in remission, reporting a substantial impact on different life domains. Multiple issues were found to be coexistent, reinforcing each other. Uncertainty thrived in patients regarding the aetiology of their persistent problems, with symptoms often attributed to undetectable inflammation. Furthermore, patients were unsure which additional care strategies could be of help. Often, rheumatologists were perceived to give insufficient attention to the unmet needs of patients. Patients recognized the potential benefits of receiving support from a multidisciplinary team, but identified important barriers limiting engagement with such care, including a lack of knowledge on the team's availability and competences. Care was preferred to be tailored to individual needs and encouraging. Conclusion: Our findings emphasize that unmet needs in patients with RA in remission require and deserve additional attention. Although some barriers were identified, patients recognized the potential benefits of receiving multidisciplinary support. In this regard, complementary care should be needs-based, flexible and empowering.
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.