Video: Knock on Wood| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Lupus Nephritis
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

Rheumatology’s Divergent Thinkers

Gretchen Henkel  |  Issue: February 2008  |  February 1, 2008

During post-graduate thesis work in clinical epidemiology under the supervision of Peter Tugwell, MSc, MD, at McMaster University, Maarten Boers, MSc, MD, PhD, identified 22 different outcomes measurements that had been used as endpoints in arthritis trials worldwide. (Both men would later become founding members and executive committee members of OMERACT.) This led to a key realization, explains Dr. Tugwell, professor of medicine at the University of Ottawa and the Institute of Population Health in Ontario, Canada: “How on earth were we going to come up with a recommendation for clinicians to use in clinical practice if everyone was using a different outcome?”

Dr. Boers, professor of clinical epidemiology and biostatistics at VU University Medical Centre in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, fondly recalls these early discussions with Dr. Tugwell. “The story that should go into folklore is that, as my thesis supervisor, he had made all kinds of scribbly remarks throughout my manuscript—his handwriting is famously difficult to read—and there were two remarks I could not read,” says Dr. Boers. “One was ‘Do a review on combination therapy,’ and the other was ‘Suggest a conference on outcomes measures.’ ”

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Clinical researchers weren’t the only ones challenged with disparities in outcomes measures. In discussions with regulatory agencies, Drs. Tugwell and Boers found that regulators, too, had expressed frustration with the Atlantic divide. “The idea was to get a small group of people together,” Dr. Strand says. “We were trying to make sure that there would be consensus [about which outcomes measures to use] on both sides of the pond.” OMERACT 1 took place in Maastricht, The Netherlands, in 1992, and was organized around a Delphi process to achieve consensus on outcomes measures in RA. Its objectives were:

  • To broaden consensus on the minimum number of outcomes measures to be included in all RA clinical trials;
  • To achieve consensus on criteria for minimum clinically important improvement in patients with RA, as well as minimum important differences between treatment groups in RA clinical trials; and
  • To determine whether aggregate outcomes measures or indexes are useful in assessing patients and trials.1

Career Timeline

1990 – OMERACT concept is born.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

1992 – OMERACT 1, Maastricht, The Netherlands, Attendance: 102.

1994 – OMERACT 2, Ottawa, Canada, Attendance: 112.

1996 – OMERACT 3, Cairns, Australia, Attendance: 92.

1998 – OMERACT 4, Cancun, Mexico, Attendance: 124.

2000 – OMERACT 5, Toulouse, France, Attendance: 120.

2002 – OMERACT 6, Gold Coast, Australia, Attendance: 132.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Single Page
Share: 

Filed under:Meeting ReportsPractice Support Tagged with:clinical trialsInternationalmeasuresOMERACTOutcome Measures in RheumatologyOutcomes

Related Articles

    Omeract How to Get into the “Act”

    April 1, 2010

    Meet this international organization that focuses on rheumatology outcome measures

    Patients Add Power to Research Initiatives

    October 7, 2011

    A look at how OMERACT involves people with rheumatic disease in its studies

    Patient-Centered Care Model for RA Flares Could Improve Self-Management of Symptoms

    December 16, 2015

    A recent trend to incorporate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in clinical research, and ultimately clinical practice, is a response to the need to better measure and treat what patients truly care about, and adapt to the changing healthcare environment, which increasingly includes patient satisfaction as a key metric for overall quality of care, a metric tied…

    New Criteria for RA Remission

    February 12, 2011

    ACR and EULAR update 1981 criteria to reflect modern treatment options

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
fa-facebookfa-linkedinfa-youtube-playfa-rss
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences