Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36891031›Full record

ArticleJID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health2023

Current Utilization of Qualitative Methodologies in Dermatology: A Scoping Review.

Jenny Foster, Noelle M Teske, Christina K Zigler, Andrew Hamilton, Heidi Jacobe

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jenny FosterDepartment of Dermatology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Noelle M TeskeDepartment of Dermatology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Christina K ZiglerDepartment of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Andrew HamiltonHealth Science Education and Research Librarian, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Heidi JacobeDepartment of Dermatology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The focus of this review was to determine how qualitative methods are used in dermatology research and whether published manuscripts meet current standards for qualitative research. A scoping review of manuscripts published in English between January 1, 2016 and September 22, 2021 was conducted. A coding document was developed to collect information on authors, methodology, participants, research theme, and the presence of quality criteria as outlined by the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. Manuscripts were included if they described original qualitative research about dermatologic conditions or topics of primary interest to dermatology. An adjacency search yielded 372 manuscripts, and after screening, 134 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies utilized interviews or focus groups, and researchers predominantly selected participants on the basis of disease status, including over 30 common and rare dermatologic conditions. Research themes frequently included patient experience of disease, development of patient-reported outcomes, and descriptions of provider and caregiver experiences. Although most authors explained their analysis and sampling strategy and included empirical data, few referenced qualitative data reporting standards. Missed opportunities for qualitative methods in dermatology include examination of health disparities, exploration of surgical and cosmetic dermatology experiences, and determination of the lived experience of and provider attitudes toward diverse patient populations.

Indexed as

BJD, British Journal of DermatologyCOREQ, Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative researchPROM, patient-reported outcome measureSRQR, Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID36891031
PMCPMC9986021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.