ReviewSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina
What do Cochrane systematic reviews say about interventions for treating psoriasis?
Review in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
CONTEXT AND
objectivePsoriasis is a common chronic inflammatory skin disease characterized by abnormal and increased growth of the cells that produce keratin and abnormal functioning of the immune system. We aimed to summarize the evidence available regarding interventions for patients with psoriasis. DESIGN AND
settingReview of systematic reviews, developed in the Discipline of Evidence-Based Medicine, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo.
methodsA systematic search was conducted to identify Cochrane systematic reviews that fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Two authors screened titles and abstracts that had been retrieved through the search strategy. The results from all the Cochrane systematic reviews that were included were summarized and presented in a narrative synthesis.
resultsWe included six Cochrane systematic reviews assessing interventions for treating psoriasis. The findings from high-quality evidence were that (a) etanercept reduced the psoriasis severity index, compared with placebo and (b) steroids plus vitamin D, compared with vitamin D alone, improved the skin clearance rate, as assessed by investigators, but was associated with a higher proportion of participants who dropped out due to adverse events. For all other comparisons, the quality of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low.
conclusionThis review included six Cochrane systematic reviews that provided evidence ranging in quality from unknown to high, regarding management of psoriasis. Further randomized controlled trials are imperative to reduce the uncertainties relating to several treatments that are already used in clinical practice.
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.