Abstract Background A cost of illness (COI) study aims to evaluate the socioeconomic burden that an illness imposes on society as a whole. This study aimed to describe the resources used, patterns of care, direct cost, and loss of productivity due to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) in Brazil. Methods This 12-month, cross-sectional, COI study of patients with SLE (ACR 1997 Classification Criteria) collected data using patient interviews (questionnaires) and medical records, covering: SLE profile, resources used, morbidities, quality of life (12-Item Short Form Survey, SF-12), and loss of productivity. Patients were excluded if they were retired or on sick leave for another illness. Direct resources included health-related (consultations, tests, medications, hospitalization) or non-health-related (transportation, home adaptation, expenditure on caregivers) hospital resources. Costs were calculated using the unit value of each resource and the quantity consumed. A gamma regression model explored cost predictors for patients with SLE. Results Overall, 300 patients with SLE were included (92.3% female, mean [standard deviation (SD)] disease duration 11.8 [7.9] years), of which 100 patients (33.3%) were on SLE-related sick leave and 46 patients (15.3%) had stopped schooling. Mean (SD) travel time from home to a care facility was 4.4 (12.6) hours. Antimalarials were the most commonly used drugs (222 [74.0%]). A negative correlation was observed between SF-12 physical component and SLE Disease Activity Index (- 0.117, p = 0.042), Systemic Lupus International CollaboratingClinics/AmericanCollegeofRheumatology Damage Index (- 0.115, p = 0.046), medications/day for multiple co-morbidities (- 0.272, p < 0.001), SLE-specific drugs/day (- 0.113, p = 0.051), and lost productivity (- 0.570, p < 0.001). For the mental component, a negative correlation was observed with medications/day for multiple co-morbidities (- 0.272, p < 0.001), SLE-specific medications/day (- 0.113, p = 0.051), and missed appointments (- 0.232, p < 0.001). Mean total SLE cost was US$3,123.53/patient/year (median [interquartile range (IQR)] US$1,618.51 [$678.66, $4,601.29]). Main expenditure was medication, with a median (IQR) cost of US$910.62 ($460, $4,033.51). Mycophenolate increased costs by 3.664 times (p < 0.001), and inflammatory monitoring (erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein) reduced expenditure by 0.381 times (p < 0.001). Conclusion These results allowed access to care patterns, the median cost for patients with SLE in Brazil, and the differences across regions driven by biological, social, and behavioral factors. The cost of SLE provides an updated setting to support the decision-making process across the country. (COI whole (SLE Brazil 12month, 12month month 12 month, 12-month crosssectional, crosssectional cross sectional, sectional cross-sectional ACR 199 Criteria questionnaires (questionnaires records covering profile morbidities 12Item Item Survey SF12, SF12 SF , SF-12) healthrelated health related consultations, consultations (consultations tests medications hospitalization nonhealthrelated non transportation, transportation (transportation adaptation caregivers consumed Overall 30 92.3% 923 92 3 (92.3 female standard SD 118 11 8 11. 7.9 79 7 9 [7.9 years, years years) 10 33.3% 333 33 (33.3% SLErelated 4 15.3% 153 15 (15.3% schooling (SD 44 4. 12.6 126 6 (12.6 hours 222 (22 74.0%. 740 74.0% . 74 0 [74.0%]) SF-1 ( 0117 117 0.117 0.042, 0042 0.042 042 0.042) CollaboratingClinicsAmericanCollegeofRheumatology CollaboratingClinics AmericanCollegeofRheumatology 0115 115 0.115 0.046, 0046 0.046 046 0.046) medicationsday day comorbidities co 0272 272 0.272 0.001, 0001 0.001 001 0.001) SLEspecific specific drugsday 0113 113 0.113 0.051, 0051 0.051 051 0.051) 0570 570 0.570 0.001. 0232 232 0.232 US312353patientyear USpatientyear US 123 53 year interquartile IQR US161851 1 618 51 US$1,618.5 $678.66, 67866 678 66 [$678.66 $4,601.29. 460129 $4,601.29 601 29 $4,601.29]) medication (IQR US91062 910 62 US$910.6 $460, 460 ($460 $4,033.51. 403351 $4,033.51 033 $4,033.51) 3664 664 3.66 erythrocyte Creactive C reactive protein 0381 381 0.38 biological social factors decisionmaking decision making country 19 SF1 92.3 (92. 7. [7. 33.3 (33.3 15.3 (15.3 12. (12. 22 (2 74.0 [74.0%] SF- 011 0.11 004 0.04 04 027 27 0.27 000 0.00 00 005 0.05 05 057 57 0.57 023 23 0.23 patientyear 5 US16185 61 US$1,618. $678.66 6786 67 [$678.6 46012 $4,601.2 60 2 $4,601.29] US9106 91 US$910. $460 ($46 40335 $4,033.5 03 366 3.6 038 38 0.3 92. (92 [7 33. (33. 15. (15. (12 74. [74.0% 01 0.1 0.0 02 0.2 0.5 US1618 US$1,618 $678.6 [$678. 4601 $4,601. US910 US$910 $46 ($4 4033 $4,033. 36 3. 0. (9 [ (33 (15 (1 [74.0 US161 US$1,61 $678. [$678 $4,601 US91 US$91 $4 ($ 403 $4,033 (3 [74. US16 US$1,6 $678 [$67 $4,60 US9 US$9 $ 40 $4,03 [74 US1 US$1, $67 [$6 $4,6 US$ $4,0 US$1 $6 [$ $4,

Abstract Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) are developed to align standards of health care around the world, aiming to reduce the incidence of misconducts and enabling more effective use of health resources. Considering the complexity, cost, and time involved in formulating CPG, strategies should be used to facilitate and guide authors through each step of this process. The main objective of this document is to present a methodological guide prepared by the Epidemiology Committee of the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology for the elaboration of CPG in rheumatology. Through an extensive review of the literature, this study compiles the main practical recommendations regarding the following steps of CPG drafting: distribution of working groups, development of the research question, search, identification and selection of relevant studies, evidence synthesis and quality assessment of the body of evidence, the Delphi methodology for consensus achievement, presentation and dissemination ofthe recommendations, CPG quality assessment and updating. This methodological guide serves as an important tool for rheumatologists to develop reliable and high-quality CPG, standardizing clinical practices worldwide.

RESUMO OBJETIVO Apresentar o processo de desenvolvimento e validação de uma ferramenta de apoio à decisão para o rastreamento do câncer de próstata no Brasil. MÉTODOS Estudo com desenho qualitativo-participativo para elaboração de uma ferramenta de apoio à decisão para o rastreamento do câncer de próstata, com a participação de um grupo de homens e médicos inseridos na atenção primária à saúde de 11 estados brasileiros. Realizou-se síntese de evidências, teste de campo e utilização nos cenários clínicos, de modo a adaptar o conteúdo, formato, linguagem e a aplicabilidade às necessidades do público-alvo nos anos de 2018 e 2019. As versões foram avaliadas de forma subsequente pelos participantes, sendo modificada a partir dos dados obtidos. RESULTADOS Foi elaborada uma ferramenta inédita no Brasil, com informações sobre os exames utilizados no rastreamento, comparação dos seus possíveis benefícios e malefícios e um infográfico numérico com as consequências dessa prática. Verificou-se utilidade da ferramenta para auxiliar na comunicação entre o médico e o homem no contexto da atenção primária à saúde, além de identificar a necessidade de maior discussão sobre o compartilhamento das decisões nos cenários clínicos. CONCLUSÃO A ferramenta foi avaliada como de fácil utilização, objetiva e com pouca interferência no tempo de consulta. É um material técnico-científico, produzido por meio de pesquisa, com a participação do seu principal público-alvo e que se encontra disponível gratuitamente para utilização nos cenários clínicos do Brasil.

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To present the development and validation processes of a decision aid for prostate cancer screening in Brazil. METHODS Study with qualitative-participatory design for the elaboration of a decision aid for prostate cancer screening, with the participation of a group of men and physicians inserted in primary health care in 11 Brazilian states. Evidence synthesis, field testing, and use in clinical scenarios were performed to adapt the content, format, language, and applicability towards the needs of the target audience in the years 2018 and 2019. The versions were subsequently evaluated by the participants and modified based on the data obtained. RESULTS We elaborated an unprecedented tool in Brazil, with information about the tests used in the screening, comparison of their possible benefits and harms and a numerical infographic with the consequences of this practice. We verified the decision aid usability to assist in the communication between the doctor and the man in the context of primary health care, besides identifying the need for greater discussion about sharing decisions in clinical scenarios. CONCLUSION The tool was easy to use, objective, and has little interference in consultation time. It is a technical-scientific material, produced by research, with the participation of its main target audience and which is available free of charge for use in Brazilian clinical scenarios.