Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42113739›Full record

ReviewDermatology (Basel, Switzerland)2026

The Economic Burden of Epidermolysis Bullosa: A Scoping Review.

L Agnes Grutters, Fieke Teertstra, Sjoukje van der Werf, Antoinette D I van Asselt, Peter C van den Akker, Marieke C Bolling

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

L Agnes GruttersDepartment of Dermatology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, UMCG Centers of Expertise for Blistering Diseases and Genodermatoses, Groningen, The Netherlands, l.a.grutters@umcg.nl.
Fieke TeertstraDepartment of Genetics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, UMCG Centers of Expertise for Blistering Diseases and Genodermatoses, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Sjoukje van der WerfMedical Library, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Antoinette D I van AsseltDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Peter C van den AkkerDepartment of Genetics, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, UMCG Centers of Expertise for Blistering Diseases and Genodermatoses, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Marieke C BollingDepartment of Dermatology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, UMCG Centers of Expertise for Blistering Diseases and Genodermatoses, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpidermolysis bullosa (EB) is a phenotypically and genetically heterogeneous group of rare skin disorders characterised by mucocutaneous fragility. It is currently incurable, and management primarily focuses on wound care. While the implementation of DNA- and RNA-based therapeutic approaches represents promising avenues for EB management, their enormous costs mean comprehensive cost evaluations are needed to facilitate their effective introduction into clinical practice. This scoping review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of the reported costs and time investments of EB. SUMMARY: We performed a systematic literature search of the databases MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO and EconLit covering the period between 2010 and 2025. We included English full-text articles on patients with genetic EB, from any country or study setting, that reported on cost categories including quantification of costs or time investments. Twenty-two studies from 15 countries, published between 2013 and 2024, were included. Total sample size was 3,046 patients with EB. Most studies (77%) used questionnaires and/or interviews completed by patients or primary caregivers as the primary data collection method. Of the included studies, 73% reported direct non-healthcare costs, 59% direct healthcare costs, and 27% indirect costs. Regardless of main EB type or age category, the annual mean total economic burden per patient ranged from EUR 42K to EUR 77K. Analysis of time investments revealed that patient's dressings are typically changed daily, with the patient or caregiver spending up to 2 h each day on care. KEY MESSAGES: The economic burden of EB is substantial, but it remains challenging to draw definitive conclusions about their exact magnitude due to heterogeneity in reporting. Further clarification of the current economic burden of EB care is essential for the cost evaluations and introduction of high-cost genetic therapies.

Indexed as

Costs and cost analysisEpidermolysis bullosaGenetic therapy

Identifiers

PMID42113739
PMCPMC13368022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.