ArticleInternational journal of women's dermatology2025
Concordance of DLQI and pain score in hidradenitis suppurativa clinical trials: a systematic review.
Article in International journal of women's dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic, recurrent inflammatory condition and is associated with significant psychosocial impacts on patient quality of life. Objective: This study aimed to characterize the utilization of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in HS clinical trials and their concordance with trial primary endpoints. Methods: A systematic review of clinical trials was performed using the publicly available U.S. National Library of Medicine (ClinicalTrials.gov) in June 2023 utilizing the search terms hidradenitis, hidradenitis suppurativa, and suppurativa hidradenitis. Study title, start year, trial status, intervention, design, location, and primary and secondary outcomes were collected. To assess for concordance of patient and provider-reported outcomes, we identified published placebo-controlled trials that included Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and/or a numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain, the 2 most utilized PROs. Results: One hundred sixty-four HS clinical trials were identified, of which 115 were interventional studies. A total of 65.2% ( Limitations: Significance and standard deviations of PROs were rarely reported, preventing the calculation of significance and is a limitation of this review. Conclusion: While lesion counts provide single snapshots of disease, PROs can capture perceptions of lesions not actively present. PROs are frequently concordant with both achievement and nonachievement of primary endpoints 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.