ArticleCureus2021
Prevalence of Clinical Spectrum of Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions in Patients Presenting at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Pakistan.
Article in Cureus, 2021. 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, 10 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCutaneous adverse drug reactions (CADRs) are the most common adverse drug reactions reported in the literature. CADRs have resulted in disabling infirmities during hospitalization and complications following outdoor drug therapy. The pattern of CADRs and the responsible drugs usually changes with the introduction of newer drugs and evolving clinical practices. Moreover, several international studies showed variable prevalence, emphasizing the need for local data in light of different socioeconomic and demographic practices. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of adverse cutaneous drug reactions and identify the clinical spectrum and any potential risk factors. METHODOLOGY: The current study is a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted at Aga Khan University Hospital, Pakistan. One hundred ninety-three patients who met the study inclusion criteria were included. Data were collected from patients on a proforma after taking informed consent. Quantitative data were presented as simple descriptive statistics giving mean and standard deviation, while qualitative variables were presented as frequency and percentages. Effect modifiers were controlled through stratification to highlight the effect of these on the outcome variable. The post-stratification chi-square test was applied and the p-value of ≤0.05 was statistically significant.
resultsA total of 193 patients who had cutaneous adverse drug reactions were included in the study. The mean age in this study was 47.78±8.33 years. One hundred eight (56%) were male and 85 (44%) were female. Out of 193 patients, 135 (69.9%), 50 (25.9%), 24 (12.4%), 12 (6.2%), 20 (10.4%), 11 (5.7%) and six (3.1%) had maculopapular rash, acneiform eruptions, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, erythema multiform, urticaria, fixed drug eruptions and toxic epidermal necrolysis, respectively.
conclusionCADRs are a common clinical presentation and awareness and knowledge about their diagnosis and prevention is important. It can be assumed that in our local setup, the clinical trends and medications causing ADRs are strikingly similar to those found in other countries. Physicians commonly come across these cases and they should be well aware of the clinical spectrum of skin reactions to enable early diagnosis and management.
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.