JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Performance of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: The 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were developed to improve the identification of individuals for studies of RA. We aimed to summarise the performance of the criteria based on the published literature.

METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search to identify all studies investigating the 2010 criteria and reporting data allowing to calculate sensitivity (SENS), specificity (SPEC), and positive and negative predictive values. Where possible, meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS: Seventeen full articles (total 6816 patients) and 17 meeting abstracts (total 4004 patients) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for RA (defined by different reference standards) were 0.82 (95% CI 0.79-0.84) and 0.61 (0.59-0.64). Results were comparable for different reference standards: for initiation of methotrexate pooled sensitivity was 0.85 (0.83-0.86) and specificity was 0.52 (0.49-0.54); for initiation of any disease modifying antirheumatic drug they were 0.80 (0.79-0.82) and 0.65 (0.61-0.68), respectively; and for expert opinion 0.88 (0.86-0.90) and 0.48 (0.35-0.52). No differences were observed for use of different types of joint counts. Eight studies and five meeting abstracts directly compared 1987 and 2010 criteria using different reference standards within different target populations showing higher overall sensitivity (+0.11 compared with 1987 criteria) at the cost of lower overall specificity (-0.04).

CONCLUSIONS: Two years after their publication, the 2010 ACR/EULAR criteria have been widely tested in the community. They are sensitive to detect cases of RA among various target populations, independent of how the latter is referenced.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app