Gender representation in rheumatology journals: an assessment of editors, editorial boards, and authors.

Diversity is widely recognized as a driver of excellence and innovation. In recent years, women have become an increasingly significant part of the rheumatology workforce. We aimed to assess the gender representation of the leading rheumatology journals' editors and to explore whether editors' gender correlates with the gender of the first and last authors of published articles. We conducted a cross-sectional study and extracted editorial members of rheumatology journals in quartiles 1 to 3 (Clarivate Analytics) from each journal's website. We categorized editorial positions according to the level of influence in manuscript acceptance decision-making (levels I to III). The gender of editors and of the first and last authors in all 2019 original articles published in a sample of 15 rheumatology journals was assigned using a combination of digital gallery and manual searches. There were 2242 editors' names retrieved from 43 journals, 24 (26%) of the 94 editors at level I, 139 (36%) of 385 editors at level II, and 469 (27%) of 1763 at level III were female. The imbalance between journals was heterogeneous. Females were the first authors in 1342 (48%) and the last authors in 969 (35%) of the 2797 published articles. However, we found no significant correlation between editors' and authors' gender. Our data showed uneven gender representation on the editorial boards of most rheumatology journals, but we did not find any apparent vertical segregation or influence on publishing by gender. Our findings suggest that a generational transition may be occurring among authors.

Evaluation of SUMO1 and POU2AF1 in whole blood from rheumatoid arthritis patients and at risk relatives.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disorder characterized by chronic and symmetrical inflammation of synovial tissue with subsequent joint destruction. SUMO1 is an important regulator of apoptosis through non-canonical mechanism in synovial fibroblasts, and POU2AF1 is a known B-cell transcriptional co-activator. The specific objective of this study was to measure the expression of SUMO1 and POU2AF1 on first-degree relatives of patients with RA and also in the preclinical and clinical stages of RA and describe their possible role in RA physiopathology. Blood samples were collected from ACPA+, ACPA-, early and established RA subjects recruited. ACPAs and CarP autoantibodies were determined by ELISA Eurodiagnostica CCplus kit according to previously described protocols. RNA was isolated from blood samples; the purity as integrity was determined. Gene expression analysis was made by RT-qPCR using specific primers for SUMO1 and POU2AF1 mRNAs; relative expression was determined according to the 2-ΔΔct method procedure. Significant differences in the expression of both, SUMO1 and POU2AF1 were identified when comparing arthritis versus healthy or ACPA+ individuals, suggesting that the down regulation of such genes starts after the onset of symptoms in RA patients. Also, a significant correlation was identified for POU2AF1 and disease progression whit a downward trend for those with established RA. The implications of such gene down regulation are discussed in the context of RA physiopathology.

[Performance of medical schools in Mexico: results from the Examen Nacional para Aspirantes a Residencias Médicas]. / Desempeño de las escuelas de medicina en México: resultados del Examen Nacional para Aspirantes a Residencias Médicas.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the performance of medical schools (FEM) by analyzing the results of their applicants in the Examen Nacional para Aspirantes a Residencias Médicas (ENARM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five performance criteria, two official and three created on purpose, were calculated from the ENARM-2016 and -2017 official databases to assess FEM performance. RESULTS: In 2016 and 2017, applicants registered from 112 and 115 FEM, respectively. Depending on the performance criteria, the FEM in the first place obtained 5 to 20 points more than the one placed second, and 23 to 98 points more than the FEM in the last place. Approximately 25% applicants were classified as "knowledge-deficient," and about 80% of these originated from less than one third of the FEM. CONCLUSIONS: The ENARM results provide information on the performance of the FEM. Approximately one of every four applicants obtained scores lower than the approval threshold of any specialty.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluar el desempeño de las facultades y escuelas de medicina (FEM) utilizando como subrogado los resultados del Examen Nacional para Aspirantes a Residencias Médicas (ENARM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Se analizaron las bases de datos oficiales del ENARM 2016 y 2017, empleando cinco criterios de desempeño (CD) por cada FEM: dos oficiales y tres creados exprofeso. RESULTS: En 2016 y 2017 se registraron sustentantes de 112 y 115 FEM, respectivamente. Dependiendo del CD, la FEM que quedó clasificada en el primer lugar obtuvo entre 5 y 20 puntos más que la del segundo lugar, y entre 23 y 98 puntos más que la FEM ubicada en el último lugar. Aproximadamente 25% de los sustentantes fueron calificados como "deficientes en conocimientos" y aproximadamente 80% de éstos provenían de menos de un tercio de las FEM. CONCLUSIONS: El ENARM arroja información sobre el desempeño de las FEM. Aproximadamente uno de cada cuatro sustentantes obtuvo puntajes menores al aprobatorio en cualquier especialidad.

Flaws in the design of the Examen Nacional para Aspirantes a Residencias Médicas produce inequity.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the assumption of 'equity' of Mexico's resident-selection assessment tool, the Examen Nacional para Aspirantes a Residencias Médicas (ENARM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Official ENARM-2016 and -2017 databases were analyzed. Differences in the absolute number of correct answers (multivariable linear regression) and the number of applicants reaching their specialty minimum score (SMS) per test day (odds ratio [OR]) were calculated. Applicants affected by test-day inequity were estimated. RESULTS: There were 36 114 applicants in 2016, and 38 380 in 2017. In 2016, day-2 applicants had significantly higher scores and more reached the SMS than on days 1-3-4 (OR 1.55), and 5 (OR 3.8); 3 565 non-passing applicants were affected by inequity (equivalent to 44.64% of those selected). In 2017, day-1 and -2 applicants had significantly higher scores and more reached the SMS than on days 3-4 (OR 1.85), and 5 (OR 4.04); 3,155 non-passing applicants were affected by inequity (37.2% of those selected). CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of official ENARM databases does not support the official attribution of equity, suggesting the test should be redesigned.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar el atributo de "equidad" asignado al Examen Nacional para Aspirantes a Residencias Médicas (ENARM). MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Se analizaron las bases de datos oficiales del ENARM 2016 y 2017. Se compararon las diferencias inter-día de respuestas correctas (regresión linear multivariable) y de sustentantes que alcanzaron el puntaje mínimo de su especialidad (PME) (razón de momios [RM]). Se estimó a los afectados por la inequidad. RESULTADOS: Hubo 36 114 sustentantes en 2016 y 38 380 en 2017.Los días 2 (ENARM-2016) y 1-2 (ENARM-2017) registraronpuntajes significativamente más altos, y más sustentantes alcanzaron el PME que en los días 1-3-4 (RM .55) y 5 (RM 3.8) en 2016, y los días 3-4 (RM 1.85) y 5 (RM 4.04) en 2017. Se estimó que cuatro de cada diez sustentantes que aprobaron el ENARM no lo hubieran hecho si el examen fuera equitativo. CONCLUSIONES: Los resultados sugieren que el atributo de equidad del ENARM está en duda.

Análisis bibliométrico de las revistas médicas del Sistema de Clasificación de Revistas Mexicanas de Ciencia y Tecnología.

INTRODUCTION: CONACYT's Mexican Science and Technology Journals Classification System (SCRMCYT) includes the area of medicine and health sciences (M&HS). OBJECTIVE: A bibliometric analysis of M&HS journals listed in SCRMCYT in 2018 was performed. METHOD: Twelve characteristics related to indexation in the Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC), Scopus, and PubMed databases were analyzed. Indexed journals were analyzed on whether they had recent indexed publications (2017 and 2018). Indexed journals' 50 most-cited articles in WoSCC and Scopus were analyzed. RESULTS: Of the 35 M&HS journals included in the 2018 SCRMCYT list, 31 (89 %) were indexed in Scopus (22 with indexed publications in 2017; 18 in 2018), 17 (49 %) in PubMed (10 with indexed publications in 2017 and 2018), and 12 (34 %) in WoSCC (12 with indexed publications in 2017; 8 in 2018). The 50 most-cited articles had been published only in 4 journals indexed in WoSCC and 5 in Scopus; 60 % were review articles. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately half the 2018 SCRMCYT M&HS journals lack publications indexed in 2018; this suggests that national and international relevance of these journals can be improved.

INTRODUCCIÓN: El Sistema de Clasificación de Revistas Mexicanas de Ciencia y Tecnología (SCRMCYT) del Conacyt incluye el área de medicina y ciencias de la salud (MyCS). OBJETIVO: Se realizó un análisis bibliométrico de las revistas del MyCS del listado SCRMCYT-2018. MÉTODO: Se analizaron 12 características relacionadas con la indización en las bases de datos Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC), Scopus y PubMed. Se analizó si la revista indizada tenía publicaciones indizadas recientes (años 2017 y 2018). Se analizaron los 50 artículos más citados de las revistas indizadas en Scopus y WoSCC. RESULTADOS: De 35 revistas de MyCS incluidas en el SCRMCYT-2018, 31 (89 %) estaban indizadas en Scopus (22 con indización vigente en 2017 y 18 en 2018), 17 (49 %) en PubMed (10 vigentes en 2017 y 2018) y 12 (34 %) en WoSCC (12 vigentes en 2017 y ocho en 2018). Los 50 artículos más citados provenían de solo cuatro revistas indizadas en WoSCC y de cinco en Scopus; 60 % eran artículos de revisión. CONCLUSIONES: Aproximadamente la mitad de las revistas de MyCS del SCRMCYT-2018 carecen de indización vigente en 2018, por lo que la relevancia nacional e internacional de estas revistas puede mejorar.

Fifteen-year trend in information on the World Wide Web for patients with rheumatoid arthritis: evolving, but opportunities for improvement remain.

The aim of this study was to assess the changes in the characteristics of rheumatoid arthritis information on the Internet over a 15-year period and the positioning of Web sites posted by universities, hospitals, and medical associations. We replicated the methods of a 2001 study assessing rheumatoid arthritis information on the Internet using WebCrawler. All Web sites and pages were critically assessed for relevance, scope, authorship, type of publication, and financial objectives. Differences between studies were considered significant if 95 % confidence intervals did not overlap. Additionally, we added a Google search with assessments of the quality of content of web pages and of the Web sites posted by medical institutions. There were significant differences between the present study's WebCrawler search and the 2001-referent study. There were increases in information sites (82 vs 36 %) and rheumatoid arthritis-specific discussion pages (59 vs 8 %), and decreases in advertisements (2 vs 48 %) and alternative therapies (27 vs 45 %). The quality of content of web pages is still dispersed; just 37 % were rated as good. Among the first 300 hits, 30 (10 %) were posted by medical institutions, 17 of them in the USA. Regarding readability, 7 % of these 30 web pages required 6 years, 27 % required 7-9 years, 27 % required 10-12 years, and 40 % required 12 or more years of schooling. The Internet has evolved in the last 15 years. Medical institutions are also better positioned. However, there are still areas for improvement, such as the quality of the content, leadership of medical institutions, and readability of information.

Divergent perceptions in health-related quality of life between family members and patients with rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and ankylosing spondylitis.

The aim of this study was to assess whether family members perceive health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of family members with rheumatic illnesses differently from the perceptions of these patients themselves. Cross-sectional study of consecutive patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) attending two outpatient rheumatic clinics. HRQoL was assessed using the Spanish version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Scale (WHODAS-II) questionnaire; the "proxy" version is available for relatives. All patients and one proxy per patient separately answered the questionnaire at the clinic. Differences were determined by coefficients of determination (r (2)), Z scores, and meaningful differences of 30 %. Two hundred and ninety-one patients (111 SLE, 100 RA, and 80 AS) and their respective proxies were included. The mean age was 35 ± 13 years in SLE, 49.5 ± 14 years in RA, and 40 ± 14 years in AS patients. Divergent perceptions between patients and their proxies were found in 57 % of the SLE group, in 69 % of the RA group, and in 47 % of the AS group as per WHODAS-II global score. Stronger disagreement occurred for all the three groups in domains representing cognition and interaction with other people: around 60 % in the SLE group, 80 % in the RA group, and 40 % in the AS group. A substantial proportion of family members perceived the HRQoL of rheumatic family members differently from the perception of the patients themselves, most of the time biased toward underestimation, suggesting problems in the dynamics of efficient communication and social support.

Update of the guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis by the Mexican College of Rheumatology 2023.

OBJECTIVE: To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacological management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: A group of experts representative of different geographical regions and various medical services catering to the Mexican population with RA was formed. Questions based on Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) were developed, deemed clinically relevant. These questions were answered based on the results of a recent systematic literature review (SLR), and the evidence's validity was assessed using the GRADE system, considered a standard for these purposes. Subsequently, the expert group reached consensus on the direction and strength of recommendations through a multi-stage voting process. RESULTS: The updated guidelines for RA treatment stratify various therapeutic options, including different classes of DMARDs (conventional, biologicals, and JAK inhibitors), as well as NSAIDs, glucocorticoids, and analgesics. By consensus, it establishes the use of these in different subpopulations of interest among RA patients and addresses aspects related to vaccination, COVID-19, surgery, pregnancy and lactation, and others. CONCLUSIONS: This update of the Mexican guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of RA provides reference points for evidence-based decision-making, recommending patient participation in joint decision-making to achieve the greatest benefit for our patients. It also establishes recommendations for managing a variety of relevant conditions affecting our patients.

The Use of Reporting Guidelines in Rheumatology: A Cross-Sectional Study of Over 850 Manuscripts Published in 5 Major Rheumatology Journals.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether 16 of the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research (EQUATOR) Network-related reporting guidelines were used in rheumatology publications. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of research articles published in 5 high-performance rheumatology-focused journals in 2019. All articles were (1) manually reviewed to assess whether the use of a reporting guideline could be advisable, and (2) searched for the names and acronyms (eg, CONSORT [Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials], STROBE [Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology]) of 16 reporting guidelines. To calculate the "advisable use rate," the number of articles for which a guideline was used was divided by the number of articles for which the guideline was advised. Descriptive statistics were used. RESULTS: We reviewed 895 manuscripts across the 5 journals. The use of a guideline was deemed advisable for 693 (77%) articles. Reporting guidelines were used in 50 articles, representing 5.6% of total articles and 7.2% (95% CI 5-9) of articles for which guidelines were advised. The advisable use rate boundaries within which a guideline was applied by the journals were 0.03 to 0.10 for any guideline, 0 to 0.26 for CONSORT, 0.01 to 0.07 for STROBE, 0 to 0.8 for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), and 0 to 0.14 for Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE). No identifiable trends in the variables studied were observed across the 5 journals. CONCLUSION: The limited use of reporting guidelines appears counterintuitive, considering that guidelines are promoted by journals and are intended to help authors report relevant information. Whether this finding is attributable to issues with the diffusion, awareness, acceptance, or perceived usefulness of the guidelines remains to be clarified.

Evaluation of the quality and subsequent performance of manuscripts rejected by Clinical Rheumatology: a research report.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality and performance of manuscripts previously rejected by a rheumatology-focused journal. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional, audit-type, exploratory study of manuscripts submitted to Clinical Rheumatology (CLRH) and rejected by one associate editor in 2019. We used a 36-item quality assessment instrument (5-point ordinal scale, 1 being worst). Performance variables included whether a rejected manuscript was published in another PubMed-listed journal, impact factor of the publishing journal (Scimago), number of citations (Web of Science), and social media attention (Altmetrics). Exploratory variables included authors' past publications, use of reporting guidelines, and text structure. Exploratory variables were assessed using non-parametric tests. RESULTS: In total, 165 manuscripts were rejected. Reporting guidelines were used in only five (4%) manuscripts. The mean overall quality rating was 2.48 ± 0.73, with 54% of manuscripts rated 2; 40-80% were rated < 3 on crucial items. Over a 26-month follow-up, 79 (48%) rejected manuscripts were published in other journals, mostly with lower impact factors; 70% of these had at least one citation, compared with 90.5% for manuscripts published in CLRH. Altmetrics was significantly lower for manuscripts published elsewhere than for those published in CLRH. As for text structure, the methods and results sections were shorter and the discussion longer than suggested. The corresponding authors' past experience and text structure were not associated with quality or acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: Research report quality is an area for improvement, mainly for items critical to explaining the research and findings. The use of reporting guidelines should be encouraged by journals. Key Points • The quality of research reports (in rejected manuscripts) is insufficient. • Guidelines for reporting are seldom used in rejected manuscripts. • A manuscript rejected by Clinical Rheumatology may subsequently be published in another journal with a lower impact factor and have fewer citations and less social media attention than accepted manuscripts.

Non-Coding RNAs in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Implications for Biomarker Discovery.

Recent advances in gene expression analysis techniques and increased access to technologies such as microarrays, qPCR arrays, and next-generation sequencing, in the last decade, have led to increased awareness of the complexity of the inflammatory responses that lead to pathology. This finding is also the case for rheumatic diseases, importantly and specifically, rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The coincidence in major genetic and epigenetic regulatory events leading to RA's inflammatory state is now well-recognized. Research groups have characterized the gene expression profile of early RA patients and identified a group of miRNAs that is particularly abundant in the early stages of the disease and miRNAs associated with treatment responses. In this perspective, we summarize the current state of RNA-based biomarker discovery and the context of technology adoption/implementation due to the COVID-19 pandemic. These advances have great potential for clinical application and could provide preclinical disease detection, follow-up, treatment targets, and biomarkers for treatment response monitoring.

Ranking the importance of their own diseases: A positioning analysis in rheumatic patients and their proxies.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE: To assess the positioning that patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and their proxies give to their diseases. METHODS: Subjects completed a self-administered questionnaire to rank 11 diseases from "worst" to "least bad". Then they defined the "worst" disease and ranked 10 diseases from highest to lowest importance from a list including "my rheumatic disease/my relative's disease". The lists of the included diseases represented the mindshare from a sample of healthy adults. RESULTS: There were 570 respondents (104 SLE, 99 RA, 82 AS, and 285 proxies). Rheumatoid arthritis was considered the third-worst disease (recoded ranking first by 41% of patients and 43% proxies, second by 49% and 44%, and third by 10% and 13%). A disease that kills was the preferred definition for the worst disease. "My disease/my relative's disease" was ranked fourth in importance (first by 41% of patients, second by 38%, and third by 21%). Rankings were not associated with age, schooling, disease duration, or setting. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Most respondents ranked their own disease considerably lower than other non-rheumatic conditions.

Overexpression of TLR7 and TLR9 Occurs Before Onset Symptoms In First-Degree Relatives of Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients.

BACKGROUND: Autoantibodies have a central role in the physiopathology of Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA). However, the responsible factors that trigger and perpetuate the autoantibodies production are unknown. Toll-like receptors (TLRs) have been considered as promotors of autoantibodies production to break down the immunotolerance in RA. AIM OF THE STUDY: Evaluate the expression levels of TLR7 and TLR9 as well as their correlation with autoantibodies in first-degree relatives (FDR) of RA patients (seropositive and seronegative to ACPA), respect to early RA (eRA) and chronic RA (cRA) patients. METHODS: We selected 32 RA patients (16 as eRA and 16 as cRA) and 32 FDR of RA patients (16 seropositive and 16 seronegative to ACPA). Expression levels of TLR7 and TLR9 in whole blood samples from each group were measured by real-time PCR using total RNA extracted from each subject. Also, correlation analysis between TLRs expression and autoantibodies was performed. RESULTS: The expression of TLR7 and TLR9 was diminished in RA patients (p <0.01) but elevated in ACPA- FDR (p <0.0001) and ACPA+ FDR (p <0.05) with a positive correlation between them (r = 0.749, p <0.000). Moreover, the expression levels of TLR7 correlate positively with ACPA levels in both seropositive ACPA+ FDR subjects (r = 0.582, p = 0.018) and eRA patients (r = 0.593, p = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed overexpression of TLR7 and TLR9 may occur in preclinical RA subjects. TLR7 overexpression correlated with ACPA levels' production, suggesting TLR7 may play a role in ACPA development.

Ranking the Importance of Their Own Diseases: A Positioning Analysis in Rheumatic Patients and Their Proxies.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE: To assess the positioning that patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and their proxies give to their diseases. METHODS: Subjects completed a self-administered questionnaire to rank 11 diseases from "worst" to "least bad". Then they defined the "worst" disease and ranked 10 diseases from highest to lowest importance from a list including "my rheumatic disease/my relative's disease". The lists of the included diseases represented the mindshare from a sample of healthy adults. RESULTS: There were 570 respondents (104 SLE, 99 RA, 82 AS, and 285 proxies). Rheumatoid arthritis was considered the third-worst disease (recoded ranking first by 41% of patients and 43% proxies, second by 49% and 44%, and third by 10% and 13%). A disease that kills was the preferred definition for the worst disease. "My disease/my relative's disease" was ranked fourth in importance (first by 41% of patients, second by 38%, and third by 21%). Rankings were not associated with age, schooling, disease duration, or setting. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Most respondents ranked their own disease considerably lower than other non-rheumatic conditions.

Recommendations of the Mexican College of Rheumatology for the Management of Spondyloarthritis. / Recomendaciones del Colegio Mexicano de Reumatología para el manejo de las espondiloartritis.

OBJECTIVES: To update the recommendations for the management of patients with Spondyloarthritis (SpA) in the Mexican population, and identify which variables could influence patient management. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A group of 15 experts in SpA translated, analyzed and modified the recommendations of the Mexican College of Rheumatology (CMR) and the International Society for the Assessment of Spondyloarthritis (ASAS)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) 2016 group through a systematic review of the literature by two external reviewers during the period from 2015 to 2018 using the grade of recommendation, Oxford levels of evidence, percentage of concordance (Delphi). RESULTS: Compared to previous recommendations, there were no significant changes from the year 2015. However, we modified the five fundamental principles and reduced the number of recommendations to ten by incorporating the first item in the text and combining five recommendations into two and adding a further recommendation. We confirmed the tendency to use glucocorticoids for patients with inflammatory activity and scarce access to biologicals. We identified the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients with SpA and their influence on the application of the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: The ten recommendations of the CMR and the analysis of the characteristics of the Mexican patients with SpA focussed on step therapy, including pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies, in a spectrum from easily accessible to high-tech substances available to a small percentage of the population.

Subclinical inflammation in the preclinical phase of rheumatoid arthritis might contribute to articular joint damage.

The first degree relatives of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients have a higher risk of developing RA, which is related to the expression of autoantibodies against citrullinated proteins (ACPA). Remarkably, prior to the onset of RA, cartilage damage is already initiated, whereas ACPA autoantibodies are already expressed. Here we show that both TNF-α and IL-6 are also increased prior to the onset of RA. Furthermore, when the levels of DKK1 and Sclerostin were evaluated in first degree relatives of RA patients, we found that the serum levels of TNF- α correlate with the expression levels of both DKK1 and Sclerostin. Interestingly, when the disease is already established, the correlation of TNF- α with DKK1 is lost in RA patients, whereas the correlation of Sclerostin with both TNF- α and IL-6 is further increased. Our data suggest a subclinical inflammation in patients at high risk of developing RA, which might lead to an increase in the levels of both DKK1 and Sclerostin, contributing to joint damage in the preclinical phase of the disease linked to the expression of ACPA autoantibodies.

Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) Consensus on Spanish Nomenclature for Spondyloarthritis. / Consenso ASAS en nomenclatura en español para las espondiloartritis.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a consensus to standardize the use of Spanish terms, abbreviations and acronyms in the field of spondyloarthritis (SpA). METHODS: An international task force comprising all native Spanish-speaking Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) members, the executive committee of Grupo para el estudio de la Espondiloartritis de la Sociedad Española de Reumatología (GRESSER), two methodologists, two linguists from the Real Academia Nacional de Medicina de España (RANM) and two patients from the Spanish Coordinator of Spondylitis Associations (CEADE) was established. A literature review was performed to identify the conflicting terms/abbreviations/acronyms in SpA. This review examined written sources in Spanish including manuscripts, ICF and ICD, guidelines, recommendations and consensuses. This was followed by a nominal group meeting and a three-round Delphi. The recommendations from the RANM based on the Panhispanic dictionary were followed throughout the process. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 46 terms, abbreviations or acronyms related to the field of SpA. A Spanish translation was accepted for 6 terms and 6 abbreviations to name or classify the disease, and for 6 terms and 4 abbreviations related to SpA. It was agreed not to translate 15 acronyms into Spanish. However, when mentioning them, it was recommended to follow this structure: type of acronym in Spanish and acronym and expanded form in English. With regard to 7 terms or abbreviations attached to acronyms, it was agreed to translate only the expanded form and a translation was also selected for each of them. CONCLUSIONS: Through this standardization, it is expected to establish a common use of the Spanish nomenclature for SpA. The implementation of this consensus across the community will be of substantial benefit, avoiding misunderstandings and time-consuming processes.