The study was conducted from March 2005 to August 2006. At every assessment, data on disease activity, investigations, and treatment were collected. Disease activity was assessed using the BILAG-2004 index, Classic BILAG index, and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) (7 (link)). All clinicians involved in this study had been trained to use all 3 disease activity indices. More than 1 assessment was obtained on the majority of patients during the study period.
Multicenter Study of SLE Disease Activity
The study was conducted from March 2005 to August 2006. At every assessment, data on disease activity, investigations, and treatment were collected. Disease activity was assessed using the BILAG-2004 index, Classic BILAG index, and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K) (7 (link)). All clinicians involved in this study had been trained to use all 3 disease activity indices. More than 1 assessment was obtained on the majority of patients during the study period.
Corresponding Organization : University of Birmingham
Other organizations : MRC Biostatistics Unit, University College London, Royal Blackburn Teaching Hospital, Freeman Hospital, University of Manchester, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, St Thomas' Hospital, Bangor University
Protocol cited in 14 other protocols
Variable analysis
- Independent variables not explicitly mentioned.
- Disease activity assessed using the BILAG-2004 index
- Disease activity assessed using the Classic BILAG index
- Disease activity assessed using the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2K)
- Patients were excluded if they were pregnant, <18 years of age, or unable to give valid consent
- The study was carried out in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration and received multicenter research approval from the Hull and East Riding Research Ethics Committee (Hull, UK) as well as approval from the local research ethics committees of all participating centers
- Written consent was obtained from all patients
- No positive or negative controls were explicitly mentioned.
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!