ArticleClinical drug investigation2025
Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid Outcome Measurement in Clinical Research: A Scoping Review.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oral Microbial Dysbiosis and Pathogenic Functional Shifts in Mucosa-Dominant Pemphigus Vulgaris and Low-Risk Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid.Oral diseases · 2026Article
- Patient Perspectives on Treatment Outcomes and Priorities in Autoimmune Bullous Diseases: An Exploratory Survey among Dutch Patients.Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMucous membrane pemphigoid (MMP) is a rare autoimmune bullous disease that predominantly affects mucosae. Treatments for MMP often lack robust evidence and may be poorly tolerated, especially in elderly patients.
objectiveThis scoping review aims to provide an overview of MMP outcome measurement of the last two decades by mapping and listing all previously reported outcomes and outcome measurement instruments (OMIs).
designA large scoping review was performed in scientific databases and trial registries (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and Clinicaltrials.gov) covering January 2002 to December 2023. Clinical trials, prospective cohort studies, and systematic reviews were included, while retrospective studies were excluded.
resultsThirty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria, including 20 prospective cohort studies, 13 systematic reviews, and 6 clinical trials. A total of 285 outcomes were extracted verbatim and categorized into 29 domains and 9 overarching areas. The most commonly reported outcome areas were related to clinical response, safety, and resource use. The majority were investigator-reported outcomes (85%), with only 8% being patient-reported. Various OMIs (n = 14) were employed, including the Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid Disease Area Index (MMPDAI) score and tools for assessing ocular impairment and quality of life. Reported outcomes and OMIs are very diverse due to the heterogeneity in the presentation of MMP.
conclusionsThe standardized use of consensus-based outcome definitions and high-quality instruments that consider the patient perspective is expected to increase the efficacy of future MMP research and can be achieved by consensus-based selection of outcomes and critical appraisal of the measurement properties of OMIs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40986163What 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.