ArticleSkin health and disease2024
Patients' experiences of primary healthcare and dermatology provision for alopecia.
Article in Skin health and disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing recommendations for promoting wellbeing in individuals with alopecia areata: a modified Delphi study.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Global landscape of cranial prosthesis policies for medical hair loss: a narrative review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Patients' experiences of primary healthcare and dermatology provision for alopecia.Skin health and disease · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Alopecia describes a group of dermatological conditions characterised by hair loss, which are either non-scarring or scarring in nature, and range from bald patches to complete body hair loss, to general thinning. In the UK, the General Practitioner (GP) is typically the first point of contact, and some patients are referred for specialist dermatology consultation. However, little is known about how individuals with alopecia in the UK experience the care provided by the National Health Service. Objectives: We aimed to understand patients' perceptions of primary healthcare and dermatology provision. Further, we aimed to investigate how care provision and patients' overall patient journey might be improved in the UK, and how these lessons may apply internationally. Methods: An online mixed methods survey was distributed by Alopecia UK to UK-based individuals with alopecia. Open-ended text responses were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive analyses and dependent measures Results: A total of 291 participants completed the survey. They reported neutral-to-partial dissatisfaction with their GP appointments, with greater satisfaction in their most recent compared to their first appointment. Participants highlighted positive experiences with GPs and dermatologists as well as areas for improvement. Participants also expressed a desire for a greater degree of support and understanding about the psychological impact of alopecia. Conclusions: Results highlight the importance of being empathic and caring healthcare professionals for patients with alopecia, the need for training for GPs on alopecia, as well as a simplified and joined up pathway between primary and secondary healthcare.
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.