ArticleIndian dermatology online journal2026
Dermoscopic Analysis of Patients with and without Poor Prognostic Indicators in Alopecia Areata - A Comparative Study.
Article in Indian dermatology online journal, 2026. 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.
- Insights into the Diagnostics and Therapeutics of Alopecia Areata-An Indian Context.Indian dermatology online journal · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlopecia areata (AA) is an unpredictable disease that manifests as rapid and patchy hair loss and may involve any hair-bearing part of the body. We used dermoscopy to compare the dermoscopic findings of AA in patients with and without poor prognostic indicators. AIMS AND
objectivesTo compare the key variations in dermoscopic features between patients of AA with and without poor prognostic indicators. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis was a retrospective study carried out at a tertiary care teaching hospital in eastern Odisha. The study included the patients of scalp AA from October 2023 to October 2024. A total of 85 patients of AA were evaluated using the Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score and Dermlite DL3 attached to iPhone 12.
resultsA total of 85 patients with AA were included in our study (male: female ratio ~ 2:1). The mean (± standard deviation) age of patients was 26.61 ± 9.82 years. The mean duration of the disease was 5.98 ± 11.74 months. Patchy AA was the most common. The most common dermoscopic feature observed was yellow dots (83.5%), followed by broken hairs (65.9%), black dots (51.8%), vellus hairs (51.8%), tapering hairs (50.6%), and coudability hairs (22.4%). Patients with poor prognostic markers had a substantially higher SALT score (34.99 ± 37.21) compared to those without (10.75 ± 14.08), with P = 0.002. A statistically significant high SALT score was recorded in patients with disease duration >3 months. The dermoscopic features that were significantly more frequent in patients having poor prognostic factors were yellow dots ( P = 0.000), black dots ( P = 0.02), broken hairs ( P = 0.03), and coudability hairs ( P = 0.000), while in patients without poor prognosis, vellus hairs ( P = 0.005) were more commonly seen. The finding of tapering hair ( P = 0.1) was not found to be significantly associated with either group. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective nature of the study and not assessing dermoscopic response to treatment.
conclusionOurs is the first study to emphasize the comparison of dermoscopic features of AA in patients with and without poor prognostic indicators. Yellow dots, black dots, broken hairs, and coudability hairs were associated with adverse prognosis, while vellus hair indicated a favorable outcome. Identifying these key dermoscopic markers can help to assess the disease severity, potentially refine prognostic assessments, and guide treatment decisions.
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.