somewordstoolate/Q2CRBench-3 huggingface dataset:
Guideline: 2020 EAN Dementia
Aspect: Management of epilepsy in dementia
Clinical question: Should patients with dementia and 1 or more seizures after diagnosis be treated with either levetiracetam/lamotrigine or carbamazepine/phenytoin/valproate?
Population: Patients with dementia and 1 or more seizures of undertermined origin after the diagnosis of dementia
Intervention: Treatment with either levetiracetam or lamotrigin
Comparator: Treatment with either carbamazepine, phenytoin, valproate
Outcomes:
Treatment with either carbamazepine, phenytoin, valproate: 1. Serious adverse events
2. Global cognitive function
3. ADL
4. Number of seizures
Study selection: For the present research question and PICO question, we will include RCTs only since it was the opinion of the Task Force, that these types of studies were the only relevant to address these questions.
Guideline: 2020 EAN Dementia
Aspect: Management of vascular risk factors in dementia 
Clinical question: Should patients with dementia (without previous stroke) and atrial fibrillation and indication for treatment with anti-coagulants be treated with anti-coagulants?
Population: Patients with dementia and atrial fibrillation and indication for treatment with anti-coagulants and no previous stroke or TCI
Intervention: Treatment with NOACs or warfarin
Comparator: No treatment with NOACs or warfarin
Outcomes:
No treatment with NOACs or warfarin: 1. Major hemoragic events 
2. Global cognitive function
3. Mortality
4. Ischemic vascular event
Study selection: Both observational and RCTs will be included in the analysis.
Guideline: 2020 EAN Dementia
Aspect: Management of vascular risk factors in dementia 
Clinical question: Does systematical management of vascular risk factors in patients with dementia slow the progression of dementia?
Population: Patients with dementia
Intervention: Systematic management of vascular risk factors (Hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, diabetes mellitus type 2)
Comparator: Usual care
Outcomes:
Usual care: 1. Institutionalisation
2. Global cognitive function
3. Mortality
4. ADL
Study selection: Both observational and RCTs will be included in the analysis.
Guideline: 2020 EAN Dementia
Aspect: Effects of systematic medical follow-up in dementia
Clinical question: Should home-living (non-institutionalised) patients with dementia be offered systematic medical follow-up in a memory clinic setting?
Population: Home-living (non-institutionalised) patients with dementia
Intervention: Planned structured follow-up in the form of consultations offered in a medical dementia specialist team.
Comparator: Usual care
Outcomes:
Usual care: 1. Institutionalisation
2. Caregiver burden
3. Acute hospital admissions
4. ADL 
Study selection: For the present research question and PICO question, we will include RCTs only since it was the opinion of the Task Force, that these types of studies were the only relevant to address these questions.
Guideline: 2020 EAN Dementia
Aspect: Treatment with anti-psychotics in dementia
Clinical question: Should patients with dementia and agitation/aggressive behaviour be treated with atypical anti-psychotics compared to no pharmacological treatment?
Population: Patients with dementia and agitation/aggressive behavior 
Intervention: Treatment with aripripazole, zoleptil, olanzapine, quetiapin, risperidone or clozapine
Comparator:  No pharmacological treatment 
Outcomes:
 No pharmacological treatment : 1. Mortality 
2. Agitation/Aggression 
3. Global cognitive function.
4. Serious adverse events 
5. Caregiver burden
Study selection: We include only RCTs, both on effects of treatment as well as on discontinuation of treatment, since these types of studies are prevalent, and will provide rich data to address this issue.
Guideline: 2020 EAN Dementia
Aspect: Treatment with anti-psychotics in dementia
Clinical question: Should patients with dementia and agitation/aggressive behaviour be treated with atypical anti-psychotics compared to haloperidol?
Population: Patients with dementia and agitation/aggressive behavior 
Intervention: Treatment with aripripazole, zoleptil, olanzapine, quetiapin, risperidone or clozapine
Comparator: Haloperidol
Outcomes:
Haloperidol: 1. Mortality 
2. Agitation/Aggression 
3. Global cognitive function.
4. Serious adverse events 
5. Caregiver burden
Study selection: We include only RCTs, both on effects of treatment as well as on discontinuation of treatment, since these types of studies are prevalent, and will provide rich data to address this issue.
Guideline: 2020 EAN Dementia
Aspect: Treatment with anti-psychotics in dementia
Clinical question: Should treatment with antipsychotics be routinely discontinued?
Population: Patients dementia who are currently being treated with anti-psychotics
Intervention: Discontinuation of antipsychotics
Comparator: Continuation of treatment
Outcomes:
Continuation of treatment: 1. Mortality 
2. Neuropsychiatric symptoms
3. Global cognitive function.
4. Serious adverse events 
Study selection: We include only RCTs, both on effects of treatment as well as on discontinuation of treatment, since these types of studies are prevalent, and will provide rich data to address this issue.
Guideline: 2020 EAN Dementia
Aspect: Assessment and treatment of pain in dementia
Clinical question: In patients with dementia, should opioids be discontinued?
Population: Patients with dementia who are treated with opioids 
Intervention: Discontinuation of opioid treatment
Comparator: Continuation of opioid treatment
Outcomes:
Continuation of opioid treatment: 1. Psychotropic treatment
2. Global cognitive function
3. Mortality
4. Pain
5.  Neuropsychiatric symptoms
Study selection: For the present research questions, both observational studies and RCTs will be included.
Guideline: 2020 EAN Dementia
Aspect: Assessment and treatment of pain in dementia
Clinical question: Should behavioral symptoms in patients with dementia be treated with mild analgesics?
Population: Patients with dementia and behavioral symptoms
Intervention: Treatment with mild analgesics (paracetamol)
Comparator:  No treatment with analgesics 
Outcomes:
 No treatment with analgesics : 1. Psychotropic treatment
2. Global cognitive function
3. Agitation/aggression
4.  Neuropsychiatric symptoms 
Study selection: For the present research questions, both observational studies and RCTs will be included.
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and low disease activity receive MTX monotherapy or an alternative csDMARD monotherapy?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and low disease activity
Intervention: MTX monotherapy
Comparator: HCQ
SSZ
LEF
Outcomes:
SSZ: Disease activity (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: DAS28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Disability (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: HAQ-DI (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -0.22)
Pain (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: VAS 0-100 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -11.9)
Serious adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
LEF: Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: DAS28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed and low disease activity receive MTX monotherapy or an alternative csDMARD monotherapy?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and low disease activity
Intervention: MTX monotherapy
Comparator: HCQ
SSZ
LEF
Outcomes:
LEF: Disease activity (follow up: 4 months; assessed with: ACR 20)
Disease activity (follow up: 4 months; assessed with: DAS28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and moderate to high disease activity receive MTX monotherapy or an alternative csDMARD monotherapy?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and moderate to high disease activity
Intervention: MTX monotherapy
Comparator: HCQ
SSZ
LEF
Outcomes:
SSZ: Disease activity (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: DAS28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Disability (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: HAQ-DI (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -0.22)
Pain (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: VAS 0-100 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -11.9)
Serious adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
LEF: Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: DAS28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and moderate to high disease activity receive MTX monotherapy or an alternative csDMARD monotherapy?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and moderate to high disease activity
Intervention: MTX monotherapy
Comparator: HCQ
SSZ
LEF
Outcomes:
SSZ: Disease activity (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: DAS28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Disability (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: HAQ-DI (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -0.22)
Pain (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: VAS 0-100 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -11.9)
Serious adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
LEF: Disease activity (follow up: 4 months; assessed with: ACR 20)
Disease activity (follow up: 4 months; assessed with: DAS28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and low disease activity receive csDMARD monotherapy or csDMARD combination (double or triple) therapy?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and low disease activity
Intervention: csDMARD monotherapy
Comparator: csDMARD double combination therapy
csDMARD triple combination therapy
Outcomes:
csDMARD double combination therapy: Disease activity (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: DAS 44 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.2 based on the EULAR criteria)
Disability (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: HAQ-DI (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -0.22 )
Pain (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: VAS 0-100 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -11.9)
Serious adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
csDMARD triple combination therapy: Disease activity (follow up: 3 months; assessed with: DAS 44 (Lower values --> benefit)
Remission (follow up: 3 months; assessed with: DAS 44 <1.6)
Disability (follow up: 3 months; assessed with: HAQ-DI (Lower values --> benefit) (MCID -0.22)
Serious adverse events (follow up: 3 months)
Withdrawal due to Adverse events (follow up: 3 months)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and low disease activity receive csDMARD monotherapy or csDMARD combination (double or triple) therapy?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and low disease activity
Intervention: csDMARD monotherapy
Comparator: csDMARD double combination therapy
csDMARD triple combination therapy
Outcomes:
csDMARD triple combination therapy: Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: DAS 28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR 20)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR 50)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR 70)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and moderate to high disease activity receive csDMARD monotherapy or combination (double or triple) therapy?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA who have moderate to high disease activity
Intervention: csDMARD monotherapy
Comparator: csDMARD double combination therapy
csDMARD triple combination therapy
Outcomes:
csDMARD double combination therapy: Disease activity (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: DAS 44 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.2 based on the EULAR criteria)
Disability (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: HAQ-DI (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -0.22)
Pain (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: VAS 0-100 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -11.9)
Serious adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to Adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
csDMARD triple combination therapy: Disease activity (follow up: 3 months; assessed with: DAS 44 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.2)
Remission (follow up: 3 months; assessed with: DAS 44 < 1.6)
Disability (follow up: 3 months; assessed with: HAQ-DI (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -0.22)
Serious adverse events (follow up: 3 months)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: 3 months)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and moderate to high disease activity receive csDMARD monotherapy or combination (double or triple) therapy?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA who have moderate to high disease activity
Intervention: csDMARD monotherapy
Comparator: csDMARD double combination therapy
csDMARD triple combination therapy
Outcomes:
csDMARD double combination therapy: Disease activity (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: DAS 44 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.2 based on the EULAR criteria)
Disability (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: HAQ-DI (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -0.22)
Pain (follow up: 1 year; assessed with: VAS 0-100 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -11.9)
Serious adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy (follow up: 1 year)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: 1 year)
csDMARD triple combination therapy: Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: DAS 28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR 20)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR 50)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR 70)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and moderate to high disease activity receive mono- or combination csDMARDs and short-term (< 3 months) GCs or mono or combination csDMARDs alone?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and moderate to high disease activity
Intervention: Mono or combination csDMARDs with short-term (< 3 months) GCs
Comparator: Mono or combination csDMARDs alone (i.e., without short-term GCs)
Outcomes:
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and moderate to high disease activity receive mono- or combination csDMARDs and short-term (< 3 months) GCs or mono or combination csDMARDs alone?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and moderate to high disease activity
Intervention: Mono or combination csDMARDs with short-term (< 3 months) GCs
Comparator: Mono or combination csDMARDs alone (i.e., without short-term GCs)
Outcomes:
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and moderate to high disease activity, receive long-term (≥ 3 months) low dose (≤ 10mg per day) GCs and mono- or combination csDMARDs or mono or combination csDMARDs alone?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs naïve RA and moderate to high disease activity
Intervention: Mono or combination csDMARDs with long-term (≥ 3 months) low dose (≤ 10mg per day) GCs
Comparator: Mono or combination csDMARDs alone (i.e. without long-term GCs)
Outcomes:
mono or combination csDMARDs alone (i.e. without long-term GCs): Disease activity (follow up: 2 years; assessed with: DAS28-ESR)
Remission (follow up: 2 years; assessed with: DAS28-ESR<2.6)
Radiographic progression (follow up: 2 years; assessed with: Sharp/van der Heijde score)
Disability (follow up: 2 years; assessed with: HAQ Swedish version)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: 2 years)
Death (follow up: 2 years)
Death (age-adjusted) (follow up: 10 years)
Composite Cardiovascular events (age-adjusted) (follow up: 10 years)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and moderate to high disease activity, receive long-term (≥ 3 months) low dose (≤ 10mg per day) GCs and mono- or combination csDMARDs or mono or combination csDMARDs alone?
Population: Patients with MTX-naïve and non-MTX csDMARDs exposed RA and moderate to high disease activity
Intervention: Mono or combination csDMARDs with long-term (≥ 3 months) low dose (≤ 10mg per day) GCs
Comparator: Mono or combination csDMARDs alone (i.e. without long-term GCs)
Outcomes:
mono or combination csDMARDs alone (i.e. without long-term GCs): Disability (follow up: 2 years; assessed with: HAQ)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with RA initiating MTX receive MTX at 15mg or more per week (includes up-titrating to 15mg over the first month) or less than 15mg per week as the initial dose?
Population: Patients with RA initiating MTX
Intervention: MTX < 15mg per week
Comparator: MTX 15mg per week
MTX 20 mg per week
MTX 25mg per week
Outcomes:
MTX 15mg per week: Disease Activity (follow up: 3 months; assessed with: DAS 28-ESR)
Disability (follow up: 3 months; assessed with: HAQ-DI)
Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy (follow up: 3 months)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: 3 months)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with RA who have not been previously treated with boDMARD and tsDAMRD receive T2T strategies or usual care?
Population: Patients with RA who have not been previously treated with boDMARD and tsDAMRD
Intervention: T2T strategy
Comparator: Usual care
Outcomes:
usual care: Remission (follow up: range 6 months to 1.5 years; assessed with: DAS 44 <1.4 and DAS28 ESR <2.6)
Disease activity (follow up: range 6 months to 1.5 years; assessed with: ACR 20)
Disease activity (follow up: range 6 months to 1.5 years; assessed with: ACR 50)
Disease activity (follow up: range 6 months to 1.5 years; assessed with: ACR 70)
Disease activity (follow up: range 6 months to 1.5 years; assessed with: DAS 44/DAS28 ESR)
Radiographic progression (follow up: range 1 years to 1.5 years; assessed with: modified Sharp score)
Disability (follow up: range 1.5 years to 2 years; assessed with: HAQ-DI)
Quality of life (follow up: 1.5 years; assessed with: SF-12 PCS)
Quality of life (follow up: 1.5 years; assessed with: SF-12 MCS)
Pain (follow up: range 1.5 years to 2 years; assessed with: VAS 0-100)
Withdrawal due to lack of efficacy (follow up: range 1.5 years to 2 years)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: range 6 months to 1.5 years)
Serious adverse events (follow up: 6 months)
Cardiovascular disease (follow up: 2 years)
Death (follow up: mean 1.5 years)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with RA who have had an inadequate response to 1 or more bDMARD or tsDAMRD receive T2T strategies or usual care?
Population: Patients with RA who have had an inadequate response to 1 or more bDMARD or tsDAMRD
Intervention: T2T strategy
Comparator: Usual care
Outcomes:
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: In patients with RA receiving T2T, should the treatment goal be low disease activity or remission?
Population: Patients with RA
Intervention: Treat to low disease activity
Comparator: Treat to remission
Outcomes:
treat to remission: DAS remission (follow up: 1 year; assessed with DAS44 ≤ 1.6)
Disease activity (follow up: 1 year; assessed with DAS-44 (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.2)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: In patients with RA planning to receive T2T, should the interval for treatment escalation be 3 months versus less than 3 months after the last DMARD change?
Population: Patients with RA planning to receive T2T
Intervention: Escalate treatment 3 months or later after the last DMARD change
Comparator: Escalate treatment less than 3 months after the last DMARD change
Outcomes:
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with RA not tolerating MTX, on folic acid 1 mg/day, increase the dose of folic acid?
Population: Patients with RA not tolerating MTX on 1mg of folic acid
Intervention: Increase dose of folic acid to > 1mg per day
Comparator: Remain on folic acid 1 mg per day
Outcomes:
Remain on folic acid 1 mg per day: Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: DAS28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Disability (follow up: range 6 months to 12 months; assessed with: HAQ-DI or modified HAQ (Lower values – > benefit) (values>0.2 are considered clinically significant)
Withdrawal due to adverse events (follow up: range 6 months to 12 months)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with RA not tolerating MTX, switch to alternative mono or combination csDMARDs, to a boDMARD, or to a tsDMARD?
Population: Patients with RA not tolerating MTX monotherapy (either oral or SC)
Intervention: Switch to non-MTX mono or combination csDMARDs
Comparator: Switch to TNF Inhibitor
Switch to Abatacept
Switch to Rituximab
Switch to IL-6 Receptor Inhibitor
Switch to JAK Inhibitor
Continue same management
Outcomes:
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with RA on maximally tolerated dose of MTX monotherapy who are NOT at target, switch to alternative mono or combination csDMARDs, to a boDMARD, or to a tsDMARD?
Population: Patients with RA on maximally tolerated dose of MTX monotherapy (either oral or SC) who are not at target
Intervention: Switch to non-MTX mono or combination csDMARDs
Comparator: Switch to TNF Inhibitor
Switch to Abatacept
Switch to Rituximab
Switch to IL-6 Receptor Inhibitor
Switch to JAK Inhibitor
Continue same management
Outcomes:
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with RA on oral MTX monotherapy 15 mg per week who are NOT at target increase the dose of oral MTX or switch to SC MTX?
Population: Patients with RA on oral MTX monotherapy 15 mg per week who are not at target
Intervention: Increase the dose of oral MTX
Comparator: Switch to SC MTX
Outcomes:
Switch to SC MTX: Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR 20)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR 50)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR 70)
Disability (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: HAQ)
Pain (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: VAS 0-10)
Guideline: 2021 ACR RA
Clinical question: Should patients with RA on maximally tolerated dose of MTX monotherapy who are NOT at target add SSZ and HCQ, add LEF, add a boDMARD, or add a tsDMARD?
Population: Patients with RA on maximally tolerated dose of MTX monotherapy (either oral or SC) who are not at target
Intervention: Add SSZ and HCQ
Comparator: Add LEF
Add TNF Inhibitor
Add Abatacept
Add Rituximab
Add IL-6 Receptor Inhibitor
Add JAK Inhibitor
Continue same management
Outcomes:
add TNF Inhibitor: Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR20)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR50)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: ACR70)
Disease activity (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: DAS28-ESR (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -1.17)
Remission (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: DAS28-CRP < 2.6)
Radiographic progression (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: mTSS (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID 4.6)
Disability (follow up: 6 months; assessed with: HAQ-DI (Lower values – > benefit) (MCID -0.22)
Malignancy (from SRs of harms)