Mycoses · 2021
Race reporting and representation in onychomycosis clinical trials: A systematic review.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
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.
Chang Michelle J, Qiu Yuqing, Lipner Shari R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Onychomycosis is the most common nail disease seen in clinical practice. Inclusion of diverse groups in onychomycosis clinical trials subjects is necessary to generalise efficacy data.
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to systematically review race and ethnicity reporting and representation, as well as, treatment outcomes in onychomycosis clinical trials.
METHODS: A PubMed search for onychomycosis clinical trials was performed in August 2020. Primary clinical trial data were included and post hoc analyses were excluded. Categorical variables were compared using chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. Statistical significance was set at p < .05. Photos in articles were categorised by Fitzpatrick skin type.
RESULTS: Only 32/182 (17.5%) trials reported on race and/or ethnicity and only one trial compared treatment efficacy in different subgroups. Darker skin colours were infrequently depicted in articles. Topical treatment, location with ≥1 US-based site, industry funding type and publication date after 2000 were significantly associated with reporting of racial/ethnic data (p < .05 for all comparisons).
LIMITATIONS: Demographics on excluded subjects and methods of recruitment were not available. Assigning Fitzpatrick skin type is inherently subjective.
CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights a need for consistent reporting of races and ethnicities of onychomycosis clinical trial participants with subgroup analyses of treatment efficacies.
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to systematically review race and ethnicity reporting and representation, as well as, treatment outcomes in onychomycosis clinical trials.
METHODS: A PubMed search for onychomycosis clinical trials was performed in August 2020. Primary clinical trial data were included and post hoc analyses were excluded. Categorical variables were compared using chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests. Statistical significance was set at p < .05. Photos in articles were categorised by Fitzpatrick skin type.
RESULTS: Only 32/182 (17.5%) trials reported on race and/or ethnicity and only one trial compared treatment efficacy in different subgroups. Darker skin colours were infrequently depicted in articles. Topical treatment, location with ≥1 US-based site, industry funding type and publication date after 2000 were significantly associated with reporting of racial/ethnic data (p < .05 for all comparisons).
LIMITATIONS: Demographics on excluded subjects and methods of recruitment were not available. Assigning Fitzpatrick skin type is inherently subjective.
CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights a need for consistent reporting of races and ethnicities of onychomycosis clinical trial participants with subgroup analyses of treatment efficacies.