ArticleDer Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete2021
[Decision criteria and patient characteristics for patient-oriented treatment of field cancerization : Standardized algorithm for personalized treatment concepts].
Article in Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Photoaging and Cosmetic Result with Artificial Daylight Photo-dynamic Therapy Using Methyl Aminolevulinate.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundActinic keratosis (AK), which frequently affects larger skin areas (field cancerization), is characterized by chronic course. Weighing therapy-specific advantages and disadvantages of field-oriented therapy for individual patients is challenging.
objectivesThe main objective was the development of patient-oriented decision criteria for the pragmatic classification of field-directed AK treatment options in patients with a predisposition for field cancerization (patient types 1-3). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe development of the decision criteria and patient typology was based on a nominal respectively structured multilevel group process. The developed algorithm was then subsequently applied for the systematic evaluation of field-directed AK therapies.
resultsPatient-relevant criteria for the treatment decision included (among others): effectiveness, selectivity, safety, duration of therapy, cosmesis, patient preference and comorbidities. With regard to the decision criteria and patient types in which field therapy was the treatment of choice, daylight photodynamic therapy notably met the requirement profile.
conclusionThe definition of patient-relevant and therapy-related decision criteria in AK field therapy allows a systematic yet practice-oriented approach to classify specific treatment options and to derive individual treatment decisions.
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.