Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37799370›Full record

ArticleSkin health and disease2023

Psychiatric comorbidities on an inpatient dermatology consultation service: A cross-sectional analysis.

Thomas Norman, Jana Guenther, Natalia Vecerek, Brandon L Adler, Ashley Crew, Scott Worswick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Skin health and disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. European S2k Guideline on Chronic PruritusActa dermato-venereologica · 2025
    Guideline
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

6 authors.

Thomas NormanKeck School of Medicine University of Southern California Los Angeles California USA.
Jana GuentherKeck School of Medicine University of Southern California Los Angeles California USA.
Natalia VecerekDepartment of Dermatology Keck School of Medicine University of Southern California Los Angeles California USA.
Brandon L AdlerDepartment of Dermatology Keck School of Medicine University of Southern California Los Angeles California USA.
Ashley CrewDepartment of Dermatology Keck School of Medicine University of Southern California Los Angeles California USA.
Scott WorswickDepartment of Dermatology Keck School of Medicine University of Southern California Los Angeles California USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the high prevalence of psychiatric illness in hospitalised dermatology patients, characterisation of psychiatric comorbidities on an inpatient dermatology consultation service in the United States has yet to be performed. To fill this gap in knowledge, we investigated the prevalence of and factors associated with psychiatric illness on the inpatient dermatology consultation service at the University of Southern California. Of the 429 patients seen by the dermatology consultation service between June 2021 to July 2022, 147 (34%) had psychiatric illness (defined as having at least 1 psychiatric diagnosis). Increasing age was associated with a decreased likelihood of psychiatric illness, while housing instability, chronic dermatologic disease, drug reaction, and pruritus without rash were associated with an increased likelihood of psychiatric illness. The high prevalence of psychiatric illness observed in hospitalised dermatology patients emphasises the importance of collaboration between consultant dermatologists and mental health specialists, particularly when specific sociodemographic or disease factors are present.

Identifiers

PMID37799370
PMCPMC10549832

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.