Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28553130›Full record

ReviewClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2017

Patient satisfaction and reported outcomes on the management of actinic keratosis.

Raveena Khanna, Anshika Bakshi, Yasmin Amir, Gary Goldenberg

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Tirbanibulin for Actinic Keratosis: Insights into the Mechanism of Action.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Raveena KhannaDepartment of Dermatology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.
Anshika BakshiRutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway Township, NJ, USA.
Yasmin AmirDepartment of Dermatology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.
Gary GoldenbergDepartment of Dermatology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Actinic keratosis (AK) is a common dermatologic condition in which hyperplastic epidermal lesions develop in response to excessive and chronic exposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation. If left untreated, AK can progress to squamous cell carcinomas of the skin. Incidence is rising worldwide as a result of the progressive aging of populations and an increase in lifetime cumulative exposure to UV radiation. Currently, various treatment options exist, which range from topical medications to light-based therapies and procedural modalities. In this article, we will review the treatment options for AK with a focus on assessments of patient satisfaction with treatment.

Indexed as

actinic keratosisoutcomespatient satisfactionquality of lifetreatment

Identifiers

PMID28553130
PMCPMC5439540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.