MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409068291 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.2024-1012

A Systematic Review of Clinical Trial Designs and Outcome Measures in Sjögren Disease Randomized Controlled Trials

2025· review· en· W4409068291 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maxime Beydon, Yann Nguyen, Rachael A. Gordon, Nathan Foulquier, Coralie Bouillot, Katherine M. Hammitt, Simon Bowman, Xavier Mariette, Divi Cornec, Sara S. McCoy, Raphaèle Séror

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSalivary Gland Disorders and Functions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEClinical trialPhysical therapyDiseasePatient-reported outcomeInternal medicineQuality of life (healthcare)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review all existing Sjögren disease (SjD)-related instruments reported in clinical trials for SjD. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline (PubMed) and EMBASE between January 2002 and March 2023 to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using both a manual approach and artificial intelligence software (Bibliography BOT). We extracted all the instruments used as primary or secondary outcomes and assessed whether the study succeeded in improving the outcome. We also classified the instruments according to the recently defined preliminary outcome domains. RESULTS: Among 5420 references, 60 RCTs were included, focusing either on overall disease manifestations (53%) or on a single organ/symptom (eg, dry eyes [17%], xerostomia [15%], fatigue [12%], or pulmonary function [3%]). Primary outcomes included measures of oral or ocular dryness, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), systemic activity, and other outcomes. Common instruments used were European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) Sjögren Syndrome Disease Activity Index (ESSDAI), EULAR Sjögren Syndrome Patient-Reported Index, Schirmer-I test for unstimulated salivary flow, and IgG levels. ESSDAI was a primary outcome in 11 studies, with 45% of studies reaching significance, whereas none of the 16 studies with ESSDAI as a secondary outcome reached significance. PROs were the primary outcome in 34 studies. Glandular function measurements varied, with unstimulated salivary flow as the most commonly measured outcome. Life impact was assessed more frequently as a secondary outcome. Only 2 studies focused on biological activity. CONCLUSION: Our review highlighted the heterogeneity of SjD RCTs in both the study designs and outcomes. The use of PROs and composite outcomes has increased in recent years, highlighting a shift from objective dryness measures to more holistic patient-centered outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.090
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.299
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0900.299
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0260.013
Bibliometrics0.0170.014
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.229
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicSalivary Gland Disorders and FunctionsFrench-language works237,207