↓ Skip to main content

The British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registers in Ankylosing Spondylitis (BSRBR-AS) study: Protocol for a prospective cohort study of the long-term safety and quality of life outcomes of…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
19 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The British Society for Rheumatology Biologics Registers in Ankylosing Spondylitis (BSRBR-AS) study: Protocol for a prospective cohort study of the long-term safety and quality of life outcomes of biologic treatment
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12891-015-0805-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gary J. Macfarlane, Maxwell S. Barnish, Elizabeth A. Jones, Lesley Kay, Andrew Keat, Karen T. Meldrum, Ejaz Pathan, Roger D. Sturrock, Claudia Zabke, Paul McNamee, Gareth T. Jones

Abstract

Axial spondyloarthropathy typically has its onset in early adulthood and can impact significantly on quality of life. In the UK, biologic anti-tumour necrosis factor therapy is recommended for patients who are unresponsive to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. There remain several unresolved issues about the long-term safety and quality of life outcomes of biologic treatment in axial spondyloarthropathy. Long-term "real-world" surveillance data are required to complement data from randomised controlled trials. We are conducting a UK-wide prospective cohort study of patients with axial spondyloarthropathy who are naïve to biologic therapy at the time of recruitment. Those about to commence anti-tumour necrosis factor biologic therapy will enter a "biologic" sub-cohort with other patients assigned to a "non-biologic" sub-cohort. The primary objective is to determine whether the use of biologic therapy is associated with an increased risk of serious infection, while secondary objectives are to assess differences in malignancy, serious comorbidity, all-cause mortality but also assess impact on specific clinical domains (physical health, mental health and quality of life) including work outcomes between biologic and non-biologic patient cohorts. Patients will be followed-up for up to 5 years. Data are obtained at baseline and at standard clinical follow-up visits - at 3, 6 and 12 months and then annually for the biologic cohort and annually for the non-biologic cohort. This study will also collect biological samples for genetic analysis. Although biologic therapy is widely used for ankylosing spondylitis patients who are unresponsive to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, the majority of the available safety information comes from rheumatoid arthritis, where increased infection risk has consistently been shown. However, given the typical demographic differences between rheumatoid arthritis and axial spondyloarthropathy patients, it is important to develop an epidemiologically rigorous cohort of patients receiving biologic therapy to effectively evaluate outcomes with regard not only to safety but also to quantify benefits across clinical, psychosocial and work outcomes. This is an observational cohort study and clinical trial registration was not required or obtained.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 74 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 13%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 16 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 41%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 8%
Psychology 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 19 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,832,608
of 25,843,331 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#323
of 4,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,563
of 294,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#4
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,843,331 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,457 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,317 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.