ArticleBMJ open2026
Quantitative evaluations of time-course and effectiveness of systemic treatments for atopic dermatitis: protocol for a pharmacodynamic model-based meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTreatment responses to systemic therapies for atopic dermatitis (AD) may vary significantly based on medication types, treatment duration, concomitant topical corticosteroid use and specific patient subgroups. Evidence regarding the optimal medication selection and predictors of treatment response is warranted. A systematic approach to studying the effectiveness of systemic treatments from multiple perspectives may generate previously unreported evidence. We aim to quantitatively evaluate the time-course and effectiveness of various systemic treatments for AD, and to identify associated factors that significantly affect their effectiveness, using a pharmacodynamic model-based meta-analysis (MBMA). This protocol describes the methods for this analysis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Data for the analysis will mainly originate from the database of a living network meta-analysis. We will include randomised controlled trials examining systemic treatments against placebo or any active comparator in patients with moderate-to-severe AD. The Investigator Global Assessment Scale, the Eczema Area and Severity Index Scale, the Patient Oriented Eczema Measure Scale and scales measuring quality of life or itch will be used as outcome measures. Study screening, data extraction and quality assessment will be conducted by two investigators independently. Where available, we will extract efficacy outcome data at each follow-up time point. We will use MBMA, the core principle of which involves developing a pharmacodynamic model to synthesise these longitudinal trial-level data. Whenever possible, modelling and simulation will be conducted for both binary and continuous outcomes. This MBMA will be performed using hierarchical models with non-linear mixed-effects methods including structural, random-effects and covariate models with the maximum likelihood estimation method. Response to systemic treatments will be analysed by conducting 1000 Monte Carlo simulations. Potential influencing factors will be tested using covariate modelling and subgroup analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this study. Results from our analyses will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251068535.
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.