ReviewJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV2015
A patient-centred approach to biological treatment decision making for psoriasis: an expert consensus.
Review in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of BMI, BMR, BSA, and body weight with psoriasis severity and treatment response: evidence from a real-world cohort.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Review
- Treatment Preferences in Young Adults with Moderate to Severe Psoriasis: A Qualitative Study from the Nordic Countries.Dermatology and therapy · 2023Article
- Work productivity in real-life employed patients with plaque psoriasis: Results from the ProLOGUE study.The Journal of dermatology · 2022Article
- Comparison of Treatment Goals between Users of Biological and Non-Biological Therapies for Treatment of Psoriasis in Japan.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Biologic drug survival rates in the era of anti-interleukin-17 antibodies: a time-period-adjusted registry analysis.The British journal of dermatology · 2021Observational
- Improving management of psoriasis patients receiving biological treatment: A qualitative approach.Nursing open · 2021Article
- Effectiveness and clinical predictors of drug survival in psoriasis patients receiving apremilast: A registry analysis.JAAD international · 2021Article
- Patient Preferences for Subcutaneous versus Intravenous Administration of Treatment for Chronic Immune System Disorders: A Systematic Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Review
- Nurses' refusals of patient involvement in their own palliative care.Nursing ethics · 2020Article
- Rapid Response of Biologic Treatments of Moderate-to-Severe Plaque Psoriasis: A Comprehensive Investigation Using Bayesian and Frequentist Network Meta-analyses.Dermatology and therapy · 2020Article
- Feasibility and Utility of the Psoriasis Symptom Inventory (PSI) in Clinical Care Settings: A Study from the International Psoriasis Council.American journal of clinical dermatology · 2019Observational
- Recommendations for Initiating Systemic Therapy in Patients with Psoriasis.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2019Review
- Clinical Goals and Barriers to Effective Psoriasis Care.Dermatology and therapy · 2019Article
- Patient and physician preferences for attributes of biologic medications for severe asthma.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
- Analysis of treatment goal alignment between Japanese psoriasis patients and their paired treating physicians.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEach individual psoriasis patient has different expectations and goals for biological treatment, which may differ from those of the clinician. As such, a patient-centred approach to treatment goals remains an unmet need in psoriasis.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to review available data on patients' and physicians' decision criteria and expectations of biological treatment for moderate-to-severe psoriasis with the aim of developing a core set of questions for clinicians to ask patients routinely to understand what is important to them and thus better align physicians' and patients' expectations of treatment with biologics and its outcomes.
methodsA literature search was conducted to identify key themes and data gaps. Aspects of treatment relevant when choosing a biological agent for an individual patient were identified and compared to an existing validated instrument. A series of questions aimed at helping the physician to identify the particular aspects of treatment that are recognised as important to individual psoriasis patients was developed.
resultsKey findings of the literature search were grouped under themes of adherence, decision-making, quality of life, patient/physician goals, communication, patient-reported outcomes, satisfaction and patient benefit index. Several aspects of treatment were identified as being relevant when choosing a biological agent for an individual patient. The questionnaire is devised in two parts. The first part asks questions about patients' experience of psoriasis and satisfaction with previous treatments. The second part aims to identify the treatment attributes patients consider to be important and may as such affect their preference for a particular biological treatment. The questionnaire results will allow the physician to understand the key factors that can be influenced by biological drug choice that are of importance to the patient. This information can be used be the physician in clinical decision making.
conclusionThe questionnaire has been developed to provide a new tool to better understand and align patients' and physicians' preferences and goals for biological treatment of psoriasis.
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.