ArticleThe patient2025
Exit Interviews to Understand Meaningful Change from the Patient Perspective in a Clinical Study of Dupilumab for the Treatment of Chronic Inducible Cold Urticaria.
Article in The patient, 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.
- Exit Interviews Examining Patient Experiences with Tirzepatide and Dulaglutide for Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in the SURPASS-CVOT Trial.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study uses clinical trial exit interviews to understand patients' experience of meaningful change with respect to patient-reported outcomes and in order to confirm the content validity of some items from selected trial patient-reported outcomes (Urticaria Control Test [UCT], Cold Urticaria Activity Score [ColdUAS], Patient Global Impression of Severity [PGIS], Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]). Clinical trial exit interviews are an effective way to generate qualitative meaningful change insights. However, there is lack of data to provide an understanding of meaningful improvement from the chronic inducible cold urticaria patient perspective.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional, double-blind, stand-alone exit interview study intended to recruit participants aged 12-80 years with cold urticaria across centers in Argentina, Canada, USA, and Germany participating in LIBERTY-CINDU CUrIADS (EudraCT: 2020-003756-33), which analyzed the efficacy of dupilumab versus placebo. Exit interviews were conducted within 2 weeks of the end of treatment.
resultsParticipants (N = 15) reported symptoms including rash/redness, itch, hives, swelling, burning, and pain. The study established patient-defined thresholds for meaningful improvement: approximately two response options for UCT items, slightly fewer than two response options for ColdUAS items, and 1-2 category changes on PGIS/PGIC. Most participants reporting symptom improvement found it meaningful, with satisfaction being related to the degree of symptom relief. Notably, patients distinguished between a general symptom change and clinically meaningful change.
conclusionsExit interviews revealed key insights into patients' experiences with cold urticaria. Despite some limitations, including recruitment challenges and an all-female adult participant pool, the study provided valuable evidence for understanding meaningful improvement in cold urticaria treatment from the patient perspective.
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.