Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2015
Assessment of rosacea severity: A review of evaluation methods used in clinical trials.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАОбзорНазвание 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.
Hopkinson Dennis, Moradi Tuchayi Sara, Alinia Hossein, Feldman Steven R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Novel rosacea treatments are needed. Assessment methodologies for clinical trials of rosacea treatments are not standardized and are relatively inadequate. To determine the efficacy of new treatments, a valid and reliable assessment methodology is needed.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the assessment methodologies used in clinical trials for rosacea treatments, to demonstrate the need for a valid and reliable assessment tool, and to describe the relevant properties of such a tool.
METHODS: PubMed and MEDLINE were searched for clinical trials of rosacea treatments since January 1, 1985.
RESULTS: In all, 32 clinical trials met inclusion criteria. Assessment methodologies were highly variable, and standardized assessment methodologies were used in only 3 studies. The various manifestations of rosacea were assessed inconsistently.
LIMITATIONS: Eighteen articles could not be included as a result of lack of access to the full text.
CONCLUSIONS: The diverse methodologies make the assessment of novel treatments and comparison of treatments difficult. A valid and reliable assessment tool is needed to properly assess novel treatments to improve the management of rosacea.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the assessment methodologies used in clinical trials for rosacea treatments, to demonstrate the need for a valid and reliable assessment tool, and to describe the relevant properties of such a tool.
METHODS: PubMed and MEDLINE were searched for clinical trials of rosacea treatments since January 1, 1985.
RESULTS: In all, 32 clinical trials met inclusion criteria. Assessment methodologies were highly variable, and standardized assessment methodologies were used in only 3 studies. The various manifestations of rosacea were assessed inconsistently.
LIMITATIONS: Eighteen articles could not be included as a result of lack of access to the full text.
CONCLUSIONS: The diverse methodologies make the assessment of novel treatments and comparison of treatments difficult. A valid and reliable assessment tool is needed to properly assess novel treatments to improve the management of rosacea.