Evidence
Built on evidence
FlareForward protocols are grounded in peer-reviewed evidence. We select instruments, set dosing parameters, and define outcome thresholds based on published systematic reviews and guidelines from EULAR, ACR, and national rheumatology societies.
The case for exercise medicine
Exercise medicine + biologic therapy
Significantly greater functional improvement vs. biologic alone in RA (Cochrane 2023 review, n=2,400+).
Virtual delivery equivalence
Non-inferior outcomes vs. in-person physiotherapy in inflammatory arthritis systematic review (JRHEUM 2022).
PSP adherence impact
Integrated non-pharmacological support increases medication adherence by 18–24% in specialty pharma populations (ISPOR 2023).
Evidence library
Clinical evidence
Systematic reviews, RCTs, and observational studies supporting exercise medicine in inflammatory rheumatic disease.
View →
Economic evidence
Healthcare utilisation, medication adherence, and workplace productivity data from non-pharmacological care programmes.
View →
Publications
Peer-reviewed publications from the Arthros team and our clinical advisory board.
View →
Our approach to evidence selection
FlareForward protocols are reviewed by our clinical advisory board prior to launch. Protocol parameters are updated when high-quality new evidence emerges. All ePRO instruments are validated, open-access or licensed, and scored using published algorithms.
We distinguish between evidence for exercise medicine in rheumatic disease (strong, multi-decade body of work) and evidence for virtual delivery of exercise therapy (growing, post-pandemic literature base). We are transparent about which claims rest on which evidence tier.
Evidence gaps we acknowledge
The evidence for virtual-first exercise delivery in rheumatology is newer than the evidence for in-person delivery. Most trials to 2024 are underpowered for long-term cardiovascular and radiographic outcomes. We note these gaps explicitly in our clinical evidence summaries.
Read the clinical evidence →