{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018806214227309895, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005723630417007359, 'mean_word_length': 5.276923076923077, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
What do patients and rheumatologists regard as an 'acceptable' risk in the treatment of rheumatic disease?

A questionnaire designed to ascertain the risk of adverse effects which patients with rheumatic conditions would accept for a particular therapeutic outcome was administered to 50 patients. The same questionnaire together with 'potted' histories of five of the patients was sent to 10 consultant rheumatologists. The willingness of both patients and doctors to risk side-effects varied with both the severity of the side-effect and the potential therapeutic benefit. Doctors were more willing than patients to risk death or serious disability (Wilcoxon, P less than 0.01) for a particular expected benefit. Doctors were also more willing to risk side-effects in treating seropositive rheumatoid arthritis than in treating non-articular rheumatism. No correlation was seen for patients between acceptable risk and diagnosis, pain or smoking habits. The risks which both groups stated they were willing to accept were less than those apparently associated with antirheumatic therapy. The results disagreed markedly with those of a previous study, demonstrating the importance of the methods used in this type of work.