ArticleSkin appendage disorders2025
The 100 Most-Cited Publications in Lichen Planopilaris: A Bibliometric Analysis.
Article in Skin appendage disorders, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Lichen planopilaris (LPP) is a rare scarring alopecia with poorly understood etiology, leading to challenges in both diagnosis and management. With an increasing number of studies focused on its clinical presentation, histopathology, and trichoscopic features, a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of high-impact LPP research is necessary to assess current trends and identify gaps in the literature. Methods: The objective of this study was to analyze trends in LPP research using the top 100 most-cited articles from Web of Science. Results: The average number of citations per article was 80.4 (range: 37-289), with publication dates ranging from 1990 to 2021. The most-cited article was Kossard's "Progressive Frontal Scarring Alopecia in Postmenopausal Women" with 289 citations. The USA ( Conclusion: This bibliometric analysis highlights foundational LPP studies, emphasizing key trichoscopic features while revealing gaps in high-level evidence. It underscores the need for more rigorous research and expanded geographic diversity to enhance diagnostic markers, refine trichoscopic criteria, and improve therapeutic approaches.
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.