4.0 Article

Answering epidemiologic rheumatologic questions by cooperation with the large population-based SHIP cohort-findings with relevance for the diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA)

期刊

ZEITSCHRIFT FUR RHEUMATOLOGIE
卷 81, 期 2, 页码 150-156

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00393-021-01050-y

关键词

Bone marrow edema; Sacroiliitis; HLA B27; Osteitis condensans; Magnetic resonance imaging

资金

  1. Projekt DEAL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article discusses the evolution of objectives in rheumatic disease axial spondyloarthritis research over two decades, highlighting collaborations between research institutions and the publication of interesting results in high-ranking journals. The focus is on potential of such collaborations, with a specific emphasis on MRI and historical aspects.
This article presents how, based on the availability of new imaging methods and medications, objectives regarding the rheumatic disease axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) have developed over the course of more than two decades into a rheumatologic research group. During recent years, cooperation with the Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP) cohort has given rise to new fundamental aspects. This involved intensive cooperation between the Ruhr University Bochum (Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet) and the Greifswald University Hospital (Community Medicine research collective). The design of the SHIP cohort was published 10 years ago and the cohort approach presented in the Bundesgesundheitsblatt, which also described central methodologic questions in detail. In 2014, a cooperation project between the Ruhr Rheumatology Center/Ruhr University Bochum and the SHIP Department of Clinical and Epidemiologic Research (Klinisch-Epidemiologische Forschung, KEF; SHIP-KEF) was established, which has already resulted in publication of interesting results in high-ranking journals. In order to stress the potential of such corporations, important contents thereof are presented herein, with a focus on MRI and consideration of historical aspects.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据