ArticleThe British journal of dermatology2018
Towards global consensus on core outcomes for hidradenitis suppurativa research: an update from the HISTORIC consensus meetings I and II.
Article in The British journal of dermatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- European S2k guidelines for hidradenitis suppurativa/acne inversa part 2: Treatment.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025Guideline
- Bimekizumab Pain Outcomes in Patients with Hidradenitis Suppurativa: Pooled 48-Week Results from BE HEARD I&II Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trials.Pain and therapy · 2025Article
- Treatment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa Evaluation Study: the THESEUS prospective cohort study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2023Observational
- Overview and comparison of the clinical scores in hidradenitis suppurativa: A real-life clinical data.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- New treatments and new assessment instruments for Hidradenitis suppurativa.Experimental dermatology · 2022Review
- Identifying Unmet Care Needs and Important Treatment Attributes in the Management of Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A Qualitative Interview Study.The patient · 2022Article
- Validation of global item for assessing impact on quality of life of patients with hidradenitis suppurativa.The British journal of dermatology · 2021Observational
- The Hidradenitis Suppurativa Quality of Life (HiSQOL) score: development and validation of a measure for clinical trials.The British journal of dermatology · 2020Observational
- Office-Based Surgical Intervention for Hidradenitis Suppurativa (HS): A Focused Review for Dermatologists.Dermatology and therapy · 2020Review
- Severity and Area Score for Hidradenitis (SASH): a novel outcome measurement for hidradenitis suppurativa.The British journal of dermatology · 2020Article
- Hidradenitis suppurativa.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2020Review
- North American clinical management guidelines for hidradenitis suppurativa: A publication from the United States and Canadian Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundations: Part I: Diagnosis, evaluation, and the use of complementary and procedural management.Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2019Review
- Proceeding report of the Second Symposium on Hidradenitis Suppurativa Advances (SHSA) 2017.Experimental dermatology · 2019Article
- A core domain set for hidradenitis suppurativa trial outcomes: an international Delphi process.The British journal of dermatology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
40 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA core outcomes set (COS) is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials for a specific condition. Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) has no agreed-upon COS. A central aspect in the COS development process is to identify a set of candidate outcome domains from a long list of items. Our long list had been developed from patient interviews, a systematic review of the literature and a healthcare professional survey, and initial votes had been cast in two e-Delphi surveys. In this manuscript, we describe two in-person consensus meetings of Delphi participants designed to ensure an inclusive approach to generation of domains from related items.
objectivesTo consider which items from a long list of candidate items to exclude and which to cluster into outcome domains.
methodsThe study used an international and multistakeholder approach, involving patients, dermatologists, surgeons, the pharmaceutical industry and medical regulators. The study format was a combination of formal presentations, small group work based on nominal group theory and a subsequent online confirmation survey.
resultsForty-one individuals from 13 countries and four continents participated. Nine items were excluded and there was consensus to propose seven domains: disease course, physical signs, HS-specific quality of life, satisfaction, symptoms, pain and global assessments.
conclusionsThe HISTORIC consensus meetings I and II will be followed by further e-Delphi rounds to finalize the core domain set, building on the work of the in-person consensus meetings.
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.