1. Smolen, J.S., et al., Evidence of radiographic benefit of treatment with infliximab plus methotrexate in rheumatoid arthritis patients who had no clinical improvement: a detailed subanalysis of data from the anti-tumor necrosis factor trial in rheumatoid arthritis with concomitant therapy study. Arthritis Rheum, 2005. 52(4): p. 1020-30.
2. Breedveld, F.C., et al., The PREMIER study: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind clinical trial of combination therapy with adalimumab plus methotrexate versus methotrexate alone or adalimumab alone in patients with early, aggressive rheumatoid arthritis who had not had previous methotrexate treatment. Arthritis Rheum, 2006. 54(1): p. 26-37.
3. van der Heijde, D., et al., Comparison of etanercept and methotrexate, alone and combined, in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: two-year clinical and radiographic results from the TEMPO study, a double-blind, randomized trial. Arthritis Rheum, 2006. 54(4): p. 1063-74.
4. Szkudlarek, M., et al., Ultrasonography of the metatarsophalangeal joints in rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging, conventional radiography, and clinical examination. Arthritis Rheum, 2004. 50(7): p. 2103-12.
5. Scheel, A.K., et al., Prospective 7 year follow up imaging study comparing radiography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging in rheumatoid arthritis finger joints. Ann Rheum Dis, 2006. 65(5): p. 595-600.
6. Backhaus, M., et al., Arthritis of the finger joints: a comprehensive approach comparing conventional radiography, scintigraphy, ultrasound, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum, 1999. 42(6): p. 1232-45.
7. Backhaus, M., et al., Prospective two year follow up study comparing novel and conventional imaging procedures in patients with arthritic finger joints. Ann Rheum Dis, 2002. 61(10): p. 895-904.
8. Schmidt, W.A., et al., Low-field MRI versus ultrasound: which is more sensitive in detecting inflammation and bone damage in MCP and MTP joints in mild or moderate rheumatoid arthritis? Clin Exp Rheumatol, 2013. 31(1): p. 91-6.
9. Colebatch, A.N., et al., EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging of the joints in the clinical management of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis, 2013. 72(6): p. 804-14.
10. Wakefield, R.J., et al., Musculoskeletal ultrasound including definitions for ultrasonographic pathology. J Rheumatol, 2005. 32(12): p. 2485-7.
11. Bruyn, G.A., et al., Ultrasound definition of tendon damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Results of a OMERACT consensus-based ultrasound score focussing on the diagnostic reliability. Ann Rheum Dis, 2014. 73(11): p. 1929-34.
12. Naredo, E., et al., Reliability of a consensus-based ultrasound score for tenosynovitis in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis, 2013. 72(8): p. 1328-34.
13. Bruyn, G.A., et al., OMERACT Definitions for Ultrasonographic Pathologies and Elementary Lesions of Rheumatic Disorders 15 Years On. J Rheumatol, 2019.
14. Backhaus, M., et al., Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis, 2001. 60(7): p. 641-9.
15. Moller, I., et al., The 2017 EULAR standardised procedures for ultrasound imaging in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis, 2017.
16. Terslev, L., et al., Scoring ultrasound synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis: a EULAR-OMERACT ultrasound taskforce-Part 2: reliability and application to multiple joints of a standardised consensus-based scoring system. RMD Open, 2017. 3(1): p. e000427.
17. D'Agostino, M.A., et al., Scoring ultrasound synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis: a EULAR-OMERACT ultrasound taskforce-Part 1: definition and development of a standardised, consensus-based scoring system. RMD Open, 2017. 3(1): p. e000428.
18. Naredo, E., et al., Ultrasonographic assessment of inflammatory activity in rheumatoid arthritis: comparison of extended versus reduced joint evaluation. Clin Exp Rheumatol, 2005. 23(6): p. 881-4.
19. Backhaus, M., et al., Evaluation of a novel 7-joint ultrasound score in daily rheumatologic practice: a pilot project. Arthritis Rheum, 2009. 61(9): p. 1194-201.
20. Perricone, C., et al., The 6-joint ultrasonographic assessment: a valid, sensitive-to-change and feasible method for evaluating joint inflammation in RA. Rheumatology (Oxford), 2012. 51(5): p. 866-73.
21. Aga, A.B., et al., Development of a feasible and responsive ultrasound inflammation score for rheumatoid arthritis through a data-driven approach. RMD Open, 2016. 2(2): p. e000325.
22. Aydin, S.Z., et al., Six-joint ultrasound in rheumatoid arthritis: a feasible approach for implementing ultrasound in remission. Clin Exp Rheumatol, 2017. 35(5): p. 853-856.
23. Hartung, W., et al., Development and evaluation of a novel ultrasound score for large joints in rheumatoid arthritis: one year of experience in daily clinical practice. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 2012. 64(5): p. 675-82.
24. Luz, K.R., et al., A new musculoskeletal ultrasound scoring system (US10) of the hands and wrist joints for evaluation of early rheumatoid arthritis patients. Rev Bras Reumatol Engl Ed, 2016. 56(5): p. 421-431.
25. Rosa, J., et al., Does a Simplified 6-Joint Ultrasound Index Correlate Well Enough With the 28-Joint Disease Activity Score to Be Used in Clinical Practice? J Clin Rheumatol, 2016. 22(4): p. 179-83.
26. D'Agostino, M.A., et al., Exploring a new ultrasound score as a clinical predictive tool in patients with rheumatoid arthritis starting abatacept: results from the APPRAISE study. RMD Open, 2016. 2(1): p. e000237.
27. Backhaus, T.M., et al., The US7 score is sensitive to change in a large cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis over 12 months of therapy. Ann Rheum Dis, 2013. 72(7): p. 1163-9.
28. Ohrndorf, S., et al., Reliability of the novel 7-joint ultrasound score: results from an inter- and intraobserver study performed by rheumatologists. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken), 2012. 64(8): p. 1238-43.
29. Aga, A.B., et al., First step in the development of an ultrasound joint inflammation score for rheumatoid arthritis using a data-driven approach. Ann Rheum Dis, 2016. 75(8): p. 1444-51.
30. Naredo, E., et al., Validity, reproducibility, and responsiveness of a twelve-joint simplified power doppler ultrasonographic assessment of joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum, 2008. 59(4): p. 515-22.
31. Arnett, F.C., et al., The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum, 1988. 31(3): p. 315-24.
32. Scheel, A.K., et al., A novel ultrasonographic synovitis scoring system suitable for analyzing finger joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum, 2005. 52(3): p. 733-43.
33. Grassi, W. and E. Filippucci, Ultrasonography and the rheumatologist. Curr Opin Rheumatol, 2007. 19(1): p. 55-60.
34. Padovano, I., et al., Prevalence of ultrasound synovial inflammatory findings in healthy subjects. Ann Rheum Dis, 2016. 75(10): p. 1819-23.
35. Hiraga, M., et al., Sonographic measurements of low-echoic synovial area in the dorsal aspect of metatarsophalangeal joints in healthy subjects. Mod Rheumatol, 2015. 25(3): p. 386-92.
36. Ammitzboll-Danielsen, M., et al., Validity and sensitivity to change of the semi-quantitative OMERACT ultrasound scoring system for tenosynovitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford), 2016. 55(12): p. 2156-2166.
37. Cohen, J., Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. 1988, Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates. xxi, 567 p.
38. Vlad, V., et al., Ultrasound in rheumatoid arthritis: volar versus dorsal synovitis evaluation and scoring. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2011. 12: p. 124.
39. McQueen, F., et al., OMERACT Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies. Summary of OMERACT 6 MR Imaging Module. J Rheumatol, 2003. 30(6): p. 1387-92.
40. Dakkak, Y., et al., Evidence for the Presence of Synovial Sheatgs surrounding the Extendor Tendons at the Metacarpophalangeal Joints. Preprints, 2021. 2021090122.
41. Yoshimi, R., et al., A novel 8-joint ultrasound score is useful in daily practice for rheumatoid arthritis. Mod Rheumatol, 2015. 25(3): p. 379-85.