ArticleExperimental dermatology2026
Future Integration of Biomarkers for Inflammatory Skin Diseases Into Daily Practice: A Survey Among a Multifaceted Group of Patients and Dermatological Care Providers.
Article in Experimental dermatology, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Successful implementation of dermatological biomarkers depends on early understanding of clinical needs and adoption barriers. Yet, research on these factors as perceived by dermatological care providers (DCPs) is scarce and perspectives of patients are largely underexplored. This survey study among patients and DCPs assessed biomarker needs and adoption barriers and facilitators for five inflammatory skin diseases: psoriasis (PsO), atopic dermatitis (AD), hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) and chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU). In total, the study population consisted of 591 patients and 99 DCPs. Across all skin diseases, both groups mainly prioritized a biomarker for prediction of therapeutic response, however, DCPs prioritized this substantially more often than patients, especially for PsO (79.8% vs. 31.3% resp.), AD (68.7% vs. 37.1% resp.) and HS (66.7% vs. 34.4% resp.). Notably, a biomarker for the prediction of the risk to develop comorbidities was prioritized relatively often by patients (7.0%-19.4%), whereas DCPs only substantially prioritized this for CLE (14.1%). To enhance implementation, patients must ideally be able to undergo biomarker collection nearby their homes (travel time < 1 h) with complete reimbursement. For DCPs it is important that the biomarker is well validated, non-invasive and measurable during regular visits with preferably a short sampling time.
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.