ArticleBMJ open2015
Identifying acne treatment uncertainties via a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.
Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adapting a codesign process with young people to prioritize outcomes for a systematic review of interventions to prevent self-harm and suicide.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022Pooled it
- Patient and public engagement in priority setting: A systematic rapid review of the literature.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Interventions for acne scars.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Probiotic Supplementation in Combination With Doxycycline for the Treatment of Moderate Acne: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Clinical Trial.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Trial
- Effectiveness of spironolactone for women with acne vulgaris (SAFA) in England and Wales: pragmatic, multicentre, phase 3, double blind, randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Trial
- Analysis and Comparison of the Trends in Burden of Acne Vulgaris in China and Worldwide from 1990 to 2021.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
- Challenges in designing a randomized, double-blind noninferiority trial for treatment of acne: The SD-ACNE trial.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2025Article
- The academic impact of paediatric research agendas: a descriptive analysis.Research involvement and engagement · 2024Article
- A microRNA focus on acne.Dermatology reports · 2024Article
- Celebrating 20 years of the UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network. Part 1: Developing and delivering high-quality independent clinical trials.Clinical and experimental dermatology · 2022Review
- Setting research priorities for management and treatment of hyperhidrosis: the results of the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.Clinical and experimental dermatology · 2022Article
- Patient and Public Involvement in Dermatology Research: A Review.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2022Review
- The Personalised Acne Care Pathway-Recommendations to guide longitudinal management from the Personalising Acne: Consensus of Experts.JAAD international · 2021Article
- Article
- Patient-reported outcome measures for acne: a mixed-methods validation study (acne PROMs).BMJ open · 2021Article
- A patient-clinician James Lind Alliance partnership to identify research priorities for hyperemesis gravidarum.BMJ open · 2021Article
- Optimizing the Trial Design for a Comparative Effectiveness Study of Spironolactone versus Oral Antibiotics for Women With Acne: A Delphi Consensus Panel.Journal of drugs in dermatology : JDD · 2020Article
- Top research priorities for preterm birth: results of a prioritisation partnership between people affected by preterm birth and healthcare professionals.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2019Article
- Research priorities for young people with cancer: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Lymphedema Research Prioritization Partnership: A Collaborative Approach to Setting Research Priorities for Lymphedema Management.Lymphatic research and biology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe Acne Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) was set up to identify and rank treatment uncertainties by bringing together people with acne, and professionals providing care within and beyond the National Health Service (NHS).
settingThe UK with international participation.
participantsTeenagers and adults with acne, parents, partners, nurses, clinicians, pharmacists, private practitioners.
methodsTreatment uncertainties were collected via separate online harvesting surveys, embedded within the PSP website, for patients and professionals. A wide variety of approaches were used to promote the surveys to stakeholder groups with a particular emphasis on teenagers and young adults. Survey submissions were collated using keywords and verified as uncertainties by appraising existing evidence. The 30 most popular themes were ranked via weighted scores from an online vote. At a priority setting workshop, patients and professionals discussed the 18 highest-scoring questions from the vote, and reached consensus on the top 10.
resultsIn the harvesting survey, 2310 people, including 652 professionals and 1456 patients (58% aged 24 y or younger), made submissions containing at least one research question. After checking for relevance and rephrasing, a total of 6255 questions were collated into themes. Valid votes ranking the 30 most common themes were obtained from 2807 participants. The top 10 uncertainties prioritised at the workshop were largely focused on management strategies, optimum use of common prescription medications and the role of non-drug based interventions. More female than male patients took part in the harvesting surveys and vote. A wider range of uncertainties were provided by patients compared to professionals.
conclusionsEngaging teenagers and young adults in priority setting is achievable using a variety of promotional methods. The top 10 uncertainties reveal an extensive knowledge gap about widely used interventions and the relative merits of drug versus non-drug based treatments in acne management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.