ArticleInternational journal of dermatology2026
What Is the Diagnostic Capacity of Existing Severity Scoring Tools for Nail Psoriasis?
Article in International journal of dermatology, 2026. 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
backgroundIt is challenging to distinguish nail psoriasis (NP) from nonspecific nail changes, contributing to heterogeneity in clinical trials. Existing scoring tools for NP are currently used to assess severity after diagnosis is established. The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of two of these severity scoring tools.
methodsA cohort study was conducted with psoriasis patients and matched controls. Fingernails were scored using the Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) and the Nijmegen-Nail Psoriasis Activity Index Tool (N-NAIL). To determine their diagnostic properties, cutoff values were established. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated for various cutoff points. The best cutoff value was chosen based on the Youden Index and clinical reasoning.
resultsIn total, 104 psoriasis patients were included, of which 68 were clinically diagnosed with NP. For the N-NAIL, a cutoff value of 2 showed the best accuracy in the psoriasis population (sensitivity = 83.8% and specificity = 83.3%) and the general population (sensitivity = 83.8% and specificity = 67.3%). For the NAPSI, a cutoff value of 7 showed the best accuracy in the psoriasis population (sensitivity = 80.9% and specificity = 69.4%), while a cutoff value of 10 was optimal in the general population (sensitivity = 72.1% and specificity = 70.2%).
conclusionBoth N-NAIL and NAPSI provide accurate cutoff values in a psoriasis population. Therefore, these scoring tools may not only be used to assess severity but also in clinical trials for the inclusion of NP patients in a psoriasis population to create homogeneity between studies. We prefer using the N-NAIL, with a cutoff value of 2, because it showed better accuracy compared to the NAPSI.
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.