Do we need to lower the cut point of the 2010 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for diagnosing XXXX ?

@entity1 @entity625 @entity6822 @entity603 @entity309
OBJECTIVE: In this study we aimed to evaluate the effect of lowering the cut point of the 2010 criteria to identify more @entity1 with @entity309 among early inflammatory @entity625 @entity1 . METHODS: We included early @entity625 @entity1 from the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort with at least one joint with clinical @entity603 and symptoms for <1 year, with no other explanation for their symptoms. The demographic and clinical characteristics of each @entity1 were recorded at baseline. @entity1 were classified as case or non-case at the 1-year follow-up by the definition used in the development of the 2010 criteria ( @entity6822 initiation). To assess the diagnostic performance of the 2010 criteria, the sensitivity and specificity at each cut point were determined. RESULTS: We included 557 @entity1 in our analysis. At the 1-year follow-up, 253 @entity1 (45%) were classified as case ( @entity6822 use). In the group of @entity1 who scored 0-5 points (n = 328), 98 @entity1 (30%) were classified as case ( @entity6822 use). The sensitivity and specificity of the 2010 criteria using the cut point of 6 were 61% and 76%, respectively. With the cut point of 5, the sensitivity would increase to 76% and the specificity would decrease to 68%. CONCLUSION: By lowering the cut point of the 2010 criteria from 6 to 5 points, we were able to identify 15% more @entity309 @entity1 at the cost of 8% more false-positive @entity1 .
