ArticleCureus2026
Inflammatory Dermatoses: An Audit of Histopathology Reporting Quality and the Role of Clinicopathological Conference.
Article in Cureus, 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
backgroundInflammatory dermatoses are a frequent indication for skin biopsy and present diagnostic challenges due to overlapping clinical and histopathological features. Accurate diagnosis relies on clinicopathological correlation, often supported by multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion. The Royal College of Pathologists (RCPath) Tissue pathways for dermatopathology outline national standards for reporting skin biopsies in inflammatory dermatoses. This study aimed to evaluate local compliance with RCPath standards for inflammatory skin biopsy reporting among inflammatory dermatosis cases discussed at skin clinicopathological conference (CPC) meetings.
methodsA retrospective audit was conducted of all cases discussed at monthly skin CPC meetings between December 2024 and December 2025 (n = 89). Cases with a final histological diagnosis of inflammatory dermatoses were included. Reports were assessed against RCPath-derived standards, including adequacy of request form information, quality of microscopic descriptions, documentation of ancillary investigations and MDT discussion, and turnaround time.
resultsOf 89 skin biopsies discussed at skin CPC meetings between December 2024 and December 2025, 43/89 (48.3%) were identified as inflammatory dermatoses and included in the analysis. Microscopic descriptions met RCPath standards in 43/43 (100%) cases, and ancillary investigations were documented in 27/27 (100%) cases where performed. However, only 8/43 (18.6%) biopsy request forms contained adequate clinical information, defined as documentation of lesion morphology and duration. CPC discussion resulted in diagnostic amendment in 6/43 (14.0%) cases. Turnaround times were prolonged, with only 5/43 (11.6%) reports issued within the seven-day target (mean 44.4 days; median 35 days).
conclusionWhile histopathology report content met RCPath standards, the quality of clinical information provided and prolonged turnaround times represented key areas for service improvement. Improving the completeness of clinical information on biopsy request forms may support more accurate histopathological diagnosis. Skin CPC meetings provide an important forum for diagnostic refinement and clinician education.
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.