ReviewDermatology practical & conceptual2026
Tapinarof Versus Crisaborole for Pediatric Atopic Dermatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Dermatology practical & conceptual, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA chronic inflammatory skin ailment marked by pruritus and eczematous lesions, atopic dermatitis (AD) greatly lowers patient quality of life. Alternatives to corticosteroids have surfaced in nonsteroidal topical medicines such crisaborole and tapinarof, which provide focused antiinflammatory effects with fewer general adverse effects.
objectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess and compare the safety and efficacy profiles of crisaborole and tapinarof in the management of mild-to-moderate AD. METHODOLOGY: A search of several databases produced 510 studies; after removing duplicates and applying eligibility criteria, 24 studies, including a pooled sample of 8,218 patients (average age 17.5 years), were included. Using the Investigator's Static Global Assessment (ISGA) and Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), efficacy outcomes were evaluated; safety was based on incidence of adverse events.
resultsAmong 1,164 patients receiving crisaborole, 61% (95% CI: 44-76%) achieved ISGA 0-1; In the tapinarof group, 49% (95% CI: 43-55%) achieved the outcome, with no statistically significant difference observed (χ
conclusionMild-to-moderate AD may be effectively and safely managed with either crisaborole or tapinarof. With no major efficacy or safety differences, treatment choice can be guided by patient preference, tolerability, and clinical context.
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.