Effects of psychosocial factors on monitoring treatment effect in newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis patients over time: response data from the tREACH study

Objectives: To investigate whether, apart from effects of patient- and disease-related factors, p

A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

Supplemental material is available online at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2153599X.2022.2070255# .The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset ( = 10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported = 0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported = 0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates.Neil Levy and Robert M. Ross were supported by Australian Research Council (grant number DP180102384); Ryan McKay was supported by Cogito Foundation [grant number R10917]; Sacha Altay was supported by French Agence Nationale de la Recherche (reference 17-EURE-0017 FrontCog and 10-IDEX-0001-02 PSL); Emily Gerdin was supported by National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (GR100544) [grant number DGE-2139841]; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers was supported by Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research [grant number 016.Vici.170.083]; Don van Ravenzwaaij was supported by Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research [grant number 016.Vidi.188.001]; Alexandra Sarafoglou was supported by Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research [grant number 406-17-568]; Michiel van Elk was supported by John Templeton Foundation [grant number 60663]; James O. Pawelski and Louis Tay were supported by Templeton Religion Trust (TRT 0154). Marcel R. Schreiner, Susanne Frick, Julian Quevedo Pütter and Marcel C. Schmitt were supported by the German Research Foundation [grant number GRK 2277]

A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

Sequential ultrasound in arthralgia patients at risk for inflammatory arthritis: is it of added value in risk stratification?

Sequential ultrasound in arthralgia patients at risk for inflammatory arthritis: is it of added value in risk stratification

Tapering conventional synthetic DMARDs in patients with early arthritis in sustained remission: 2-year follow-up of the tREACH trial

OBJECTIVES: With early and intensive treatment many patients with early RA attain remission. Aims were to investigate (1) the frequency and time to sustained remission and subsequent tapering in patients initially treated with conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug ((cs)DMARD) strategies and (2) the frequency and time to flare and regained remission in patients tapering csDMARDs and biological (b)DMARDs during 2 years of follow-up.METHODS: Two-year follow-up data from the treatment in the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort (tREACH) cohort were used. Patients were randomised to initial treatment with triple DMARD therapy (iTDT) with glucocorticoid (GC) bridging or methotrexate monotherapy (iMM) with GC bridging. Patients were evaluated every 3 months. In case Disease Activity Score (DAS) was &gt;2.4 treatment was switched to a TNF-blocker. In case DAS&lt;1.6 at 2 consecutive time points, tapering was initiated according to protocol. Outcomes were rates of sustained remission (DAS&lt;1.6 at 2 consecutive time points), flare (medication increase after tapering) and remission after flare (DAS&lt;1.6). Data were analysed using Kaplan-Meier analyses.RESULTS: During 2 years of follow-up, sustained remission was achieved at least once by 159 (57%) of patients, of whom 118 and 23 patients initiated tapering of csDMARDs and bDMARDs, respectively. Thirty-four patients achieved drug-free remission. Flare rates were 41% and 37% and within 1 year, respectively. After flare, 65% of patients tapering csDMARDs re-achieved remission within 6 months after treatment intensification.CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of initial treatment strategy, 57% of patients achieved sustained remission during 2 years of follow-up. Flare rates were 41% and 37% within 12 months in patients tapering csDMARDs and bDMARDs, respectively.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN26791028; Post-results.</p

Initial glucocorticoid bridging in rheumatoid arthritis:does it affect glucocorticoid use over time?

Objectives: To compare the use of glucocorticoids (GC) over time in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were or were not treated initially with GC bridging therapy. Methods: Data from the BeSt, CareRA and COBRA trials were combined in an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. We compared GC use between bridgers and non-bridgers at 12, 18 and 24 months from baseline with mixed-effects regression analysis. Secondary outcomes were mean cumulative GC dose until 24 months after baseline with and without the bridging period, Disease Activity Score based on 28 joints (DAS28) over time and number of disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) changes. Results: 252/625 patients (40%) were randomised to GC bridging (bridgers). Excluding the period of bridging, later GC use was low in both groups and cumulative doses were similar. Mean DAS28 was similar between the groups, but bridgers improved more rapidly (p&lt;0.001) in the first 6 months and the bridgers required significantly fewer changes in DMARDs (incidence rate ratio 0.59 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.94)). GC use was higher in the bridgers at t=12 months (OR 3.27 (95% CI 1.06 to 10.08)) and the bridging schedules resulted in a difference in cumulative GC dose of 2406 mg (95% CI 1403 to 3408) over 24 months. Conclusion: In randomised trials comparing GC bridging and no GC bridging, bridgers had a more rapid clinical improvement, fewer DMARD changes and similar late use of GC compared with non-bridgers. GC bridging per protocol resulted, as could be expected, in a higher cumulative GC dose over 2 years.</p