ReviewJournal of patient-reported outcomes2025
Patient-centered outcomes for clinical trials in chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis.
Review in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Use of Biological Therapies in the Treatment of Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps: Current State of Knowledge.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChronic rhinosinusitis (inclusive of subtypes with nasal polyps [CRSwNP], without nasal polyps [CRSsNP], and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis [AFRS]) causes inflammation of the nose mucosa and paranasal sinuses. Unfortunately, evidence supporting use of clinical outcome assessments (COAs) in regulated clinical trials to assess key measurement concepts of these conditions is limited.
objectiveTo identify key disease-related symptoms and impacts, potential outcomes of interest for new treatments, and COAs available to measure those outcomes among adult and adolescent individuals living with CRSwNP, CRSsNP, and AFRS.
methodsLiterature, clinical trial, and product label reviews were conducted to identify symptoms, impacts, and COAs used to assess CRSwNP, CRSsNP, and AFRS patient experiences in clinical trials. The disease related concepts identified in the literature were mapped to selected COAs to determine conceptual coverage of each COA.
resultsTwenty-five articles, twenty-five clinical trial records, and four product labels were included in the review. Across conditions, nasal obstruction, nasal discharge, and altered smell were the most frequently identified symptoms. The most frequently identified impacts of CRSwNP and CRSsNP were on emotional functioning and sleep, and adopting new behaviors for AFRS. Findings for key symptoms and impacts in adolescents were limited. More than 20 COAs used in these conditions were identified, and 14 COAs (e.g., Sinonasal Outcome Test [SNOT-22]) were evaluated for conceptual coverage of the concepts identified in the literature.
conclusionResults specify several symptom and impact outcomes, that if improved, would reflect treatment benefit for patients living with CRSwNP, CRSsNP, and/or AFRS. Several COAs demonstrated coverage of key measurement concepts and warrant further evaluation for use in clinical trials.
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.