ReviewDermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
[New diagnostic possibilities in hand eczema].
Review in Dermatologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHand eczema is one of the most common inflammatory skin conditions and is of great significance both clinically and in terms of health economics. With a lifetime prevalence of up to 15%, it affects a significant portion of the population, particularly in occupational settings, where it is the most common work-related skin condition. The condition leads to a significant reduction in quality of life as well as considerable economic burdens. Diagnosis is complex due to its multifactorial etiology and variable clinical presentation.
methodsA structured literature search was conducted for publications on the diagnosis of hand eczema within the last 5 years.
resultsA total of 32 publications were classified as relevant in terms of content: 7 guidelines or expert recommendations, 13 on biomarkers, 6 publications on dermoscopy and histological analyses, and 7 general descriptions of the current state of knowledge.
conclusionCurrent research shows significant progress: Molecular and immunological analyses enable more precise differentiation between subtypes and differential diagnoses such as psoriasis. Biomarkers, transcriptome analyses, and noninvasive methods such as tape stripping open up new diagnostic possibilities. Additionally, data-based approaches show potential for improved histological classification. Overall, there is a growing trend toward precision medicine diagnostics that go beyond purely clinical and morphological approaches. In the long term, these developments could enable more personalized treatment and better disease management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42095883What 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.