ReviewDermatology practical & conceptual2022
Clinical and Dermoscopic Approaches to Diagnosis of Frontal Fibrosing Alopecia: Results From a Multicenter Study of the International Dermoscopy Society.
Review in Dermatology practical & conceptual, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comorbidities in primary cicatricial alopecia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical and demographic characteristics of frontal fibrosing alopecia in a dermatology referral center in Bogota, Colombia: a descriptive cross-sectional study.International journal of women's dermatology · 2024Article
- Trichoscopy of Frontal Fibrosing Alopecia in Caucasians: A Review.Skin appendage disorders · 2024Review
- The "Watch Sign" - Another Observation in the Course of Male Frontal Fibrosing Alopecia.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2024Article
- Is there a Rationale for the Use of Lymecycline for Frontal Fibrosing Alopecia?Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 12 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFrontal fibrosing alopecia (FFA) is a form of primary lymphocytic scarring alopecia characterized by a progressive recession of the fronto-temporal hairline. Although the clinical presentation of FFA is very typical, biopsy for histopathological examination is still recommended to confirm the diagnosis. Currently, a growing number of skin and mucosal inflammatory diseases are diagnosed with modern noninvasive techniques such as dermoscopy without the necessity of a biopsy.
objectivesThe International Dermoscopy Society (IDS) aimed to test the ability of its members to diagnose classic FFA through clinical and dermoscopic parameters and to compare acquired data to the largest cohort studies published since 1994.
methodsThis is an observational, cross-sectional study describing patient demographics, clinical presentation and diagnostic tools used in a sample of FFA patients collected by IDS members. A literature search was then performed using Pubmed to review studies reporting more than 100 cases.
resultsIDS members submitted 188 cases demonstrating a predominant female population (98.4%). In 71.8% of the cases, the clinical presentation and the trichoscopic findings allowed for the diagnosis. Out of 24 revised studies, 13 showed that clinical and trichoscopic features were decisive for the diagnosis in almost all cases.
conclusionsDemographic and clinical data of our cohort were mostly comparable to previous reported data on FFA. The relevant role of the clinical and trichoscopic features in diagnosing FFA was confirmed by our study and the reviewed literature. Trichoscopy could be considered a worldwide-acknowledged non-invasive technique for the diagnosis of FFA.
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.