ArticleNIHR open research2025
An assessment of interobserver agreement on lesion size, morphology and clinical phenotype in cutaneous leishmaniasis caused by
Article in NIHR open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Introducing the TOP framework: a novel phenotyping solution for collaborative phenotype algorithm development and application.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2026Article
- NanoformulatedNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The Cutaneous leishmaniasis impact questionnaire: Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation in adults with Cutaneous leishmaniasis in Ethiopia.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- From dogma to data: charting a path forward for clinico-immunological research in Ethiopian cutaneous leishmaniasis.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2026Review
- Ambiguities in cutaneous leishmaniasis classification and the need for consensus: Experience from Ethiopia.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- An assessment of interobserver agreement on lesion size, morphology and clinical phenotype in cutaneous leishmaniasis caused byNIHR open research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) remains a major public health challenge, especially in endemic regions like Ethiopia, where an estimated 40,000 new cases occur annually. Effective treatment evaluation for CL relies on consistent clinical assessments, yet variability in lesion descriptions can complicate reliable outcome measures. Methods: We conducted an inter-reliability study of clinicians' evaluations of CL lesion morphology and size at ALERT Hospital, Addis Ababa. Twelve clinicians independently examined 12 patients with parasitologically confirmed CL, each clinician assessing lesion morphology, size, and severity. Results: We found high consistency in reporting major morphological categories (e.g., plaques) but significant variability in secondary features like dyspigmentation and scale, as well as mucosal involvement. Lesion size measurements showed limited variability, suggesting its reliability as a potential measure for future clinical trials. Disparities in severity assessments highlight the need for a standardized scoring system in CL. Discussion: Our findings underscore the importance of training for consistent, high-quality clinical evaluations of CL and suggests that lesion size could be a reproducible outcome measure in treatment efficacy 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.