ArticleOpen access Macedonian journal of medical sciences2018
A Dermatological Questionnaire for General Practitioners with a Focus on Hidradenitis Suppurativa.
Article in Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of knowledge of primary healthcare physicians in the western region of Saudi Arabia about Hidradenitis Suppurativa.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- How Adalimumab Impacts Antibiotic Prescriptions in Patients Affected by Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A 1-Year Prospective Study and Retrospective Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Adalimumab, Ustekinumab, and Secukinumab in the Management of Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A Review of the Real-Life Experience.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2023Review
- Knowledge about and determinants for diagnosing hidradenitis suppurativa by ministry of health primary healthcare physicians in Jeddah city 2019: An analytical cross-sectional study.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a skin chronic inflammatory disease typically located in several areas such as perianal, inguinal and axillary regions. In 40% to 70% of cases, general practitioners (GPs) are the first health care professionals consulted by patients suffering from HS. The role of GPs in HS management could be more substantial than it has been in the past.
aimWe developed a questionnaire to assess the knowledge of HS by GPs and to evaluate if in their perception the dermatologist is the reference medical doctor for pathology above.
methodsThe data were processed by a univariate descriptive statistical analysis.
resultsOur study showed GPs could recognise patients affected by HS. They have proven to know the main features of HS. Nevertheless, the second part of the questionnaire has highlighted the considerable confusion of GPs about who the reference figure is.
conclusionThe data registered regarding therapy and follow up too, only show a mild preponderance of dermatologist compared to other professional figures, such as a surgeon, GPs and plastic surgeon.
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.