MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1001/jamadermatol.2025.5644

Медицинская библиотека · JAMA dermatology · 2026

Hidradenitis Suppurativa Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Tarafdar Nawar, Varambally Meghna, Karimi Nima, Akuffo-Addo Edgar, Ingram John R, Piguet Vincent

СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

IMPORTANCE

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder with high psychosocial burden. Despite growing use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in HS trials, variance in quality and validation of existing instruments remains to be studied.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review HS-specific PROMs using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) framework, evaluating development quality and psychometric evidence, and to perform a meta-analysis of key properties to summarize the evidence base and provide recommendations for clinical and research use.

DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed were searched from inception to October 23, 2025, for English-language studies.

STUDY SELECTION: Articles describing the development or validation of HS-specific PROMs that evaluated at least 1 psychometric property were included. Generic instruments (eg, Dermatology Life Quality Index, pain numeric rating scale) were excluded. Screening was conducted by 2 independent reviewers.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data, appraised risk of bias with the COSMIN checklist, and graded quality of evidence using COSMIN-modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Random-effects meta-analysis pooled Cronbach α and correlation coefficients; heterogeneity was quantified using I2.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: COSMIN-guided appraisal and graded quality of evidence of PROM measurement properties, including content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, responsiveness, and measurement error.

RESULTS

Of 504 records screened, 26 studies (14 developmental, 12 validation) met the criteria (total number of patients across 26 studies was 5811; age ranged from median 33.9 [range, 25-41] to mean [SD] 46.9 [14.1] years), identifying 15 unique HS-specific PROMs (10 health-related quality of life, 4 symptom, 1 treatment benefit). Fourteen achieved sufficient content validity and 8 met the highest standards for rigorous instrument development. Meta-analysis demonstrated strong internal consistency and construct validity for the 17-item Hidradenitis Suppurativa Quality of Life (HiSQOL-17) PROM (pooled Cronbach α = 0.94; I2 = 81.3%; pooled Pearson r = 0.84; I2 = 74%; pooled Spearman r = 0.88, I2 = 29%). Of 7 evaluated PROMs, 2 displayed sufficient internal consistency. The remainder were indeterminate due to absent or low-quality evidence for unidimensionality. Test-retest reliability was sufficient in 9 PROMs, and responsiveness was rated sufficient in 5. No studies evaluated measurement error. Seven PROMs met COSMIN criteria for recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study, 7 PROMs demonstrated sufficiency of both content validity and either internal consistency or another relevant measurement property (formative instruments). Further research is needed to strengthen the validation of HS-specific instruments.

Для цитирования: Tarafdar Nawar, Varambally Meghna, Karimi Nima, Akuffo-Addo Edgar, Ingram John R, Piguet Vincent. Hidradenitis Suppurativa Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. JAMA dermatology. 2026. DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2025.5644.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.