ReviewJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV2026
Practical recommendations for seborrheic dermatitis management: An expert consensus.
Review in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV, 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.
- Practical recommendations for seborrheic dermatitis management: An expert consensus.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026Review
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
Abstract
To establish consensus-driven practical recommendations for the clinical management of Seborrheic Dermatitis (SD), covering both acute treatment and long-term maintenance strategies. We conducted a modified Delphi consensus involving 33 dermatology experts under the auspices of the EADV. The process utilized an efficient, two-round, blinded voting structure to iteratively refine an initial list of 84 evidence-based statements, facilitating a structured convergence of expert opinion. The iterative Delphi process proved effective in building consensus. After the second round of voting on a refined list of 68 statements, a final consensus was achieved for 44 statements, with near-consensus for another 6. This demonstrates the method's efficiency in harmonizing expert opinion on key clinical questions. This consensus delivers clear, clinically actionable recommendations for managing SD. The key clinical implications include prioritizing combined antifungal and anti-inflammatory strategies for both acute flares and long-term maintenance. Furthermore, the consensus provides a structured framework for therapeutic escalation to systemic agents in extensive or refractory cases, offering practical guidance where formal guidelines are lacking.
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.