Protocol of a scoping review of outcome domains in dermatology

INTRODUCTION

Core outcome sets (COSs) are agreed outcomes (domains (subdomains) and instruments) that should be measured as a minimum in clinical trials or practice in certain diseases or clinical fields. Worldwide, the number of COSs is increasing and there might be conceptual overlaps of domains (subdomains) and instruments within disciplines. The aim of this scoping review is to map and to classify all outcomes identified with COS projects relating to skin diseases.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a scoping review of outcomes of skin disease-related COS initiatives to identify all concepts and their definitions. We will search PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library. The search dates will be 1 January 2010 (the point at which Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) was established) to 1 January 2024. We will also review the COMET database and C3 website to identify parts of COSs (domains and/or instruments) that are being developed and published. This review will be supplemented by querying relevant stakeholders from COS organisations, dermatology organisations and patient organisations for additional COSs that were developed. The resulting long lists of outcomes will then be mapped into conceptually similar concepts.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was supported by departmental research funds from the Department of Dermatology at Northwestern University. An ethics committee review was waived since this protocol was done by staff researchers with no involvement of patient care. Conflicts of interests, if any, will be addressed by replacing participants with relevant conflicts or reassigning them. The results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals, social media posts and promotion by COS organisations.

Acquired ichthyosis: a clinical review

Acquired ichthyosis (AI) is a rare, nonhereditary cutaneous disorder that has been associated with numerous neoplastic, infectious, drugs, endocrine, metabolic, autoimmune, and malabsorptive diseases. Review all demographical, clinical, histological, and therapeutic features of AI and focus on all reported associated diseases. We performed a systematic literature review in Pubmed/Medline, Embase, and Cochrane collaboration databases, searching for all articles on AI, with no limits on publication date, participant age, sex or nationality. Eighty-four articles were included. Total number of included patients was 167 patients with a mean age at presentation of 39 years [range 0.5-85] and a sex ratio M:F of 5:2. The most common malignancy associated with AI is Hodgkin's lymphoma. AI occurred before, simultaneously or after the onset of malignancy or systemic disease. The severity of AI depends on the severity of the underlying disorder and regresses once the disease goes into remission and may also be a marker of disease recurrence or relapse. 8% have been reported to be drug related and all occurred weeks to months after drug intake and resolved after stopping or decreasing the dose of the drug. Data were derived from case reports and observational studies. Limitations include the accuracy of published data, potential patient selection, and reporting bias. AI can be associated with numerous systemic diseases and drugs. Physicians should be particularly alert to these associations to provide adequate screening and management of patients with AI.

Development of an international glossary for clinical guidelines collaboration

OBJECTIVES

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are often created through collaboration among organizations. The use of inconsistent terminology may cause poor communication and delays. This study aimed to develop a glossary of terms related to collaboration in guideline development.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A literature review of collaborative guidelines was performed to develop an initial list of terms related to guideline collaboration. The list of terms was presented to the members of the Guideline International Network Guidelines Collaboration Working Group, who provided presumptive definitions for each term and proposed additional terms to be included. The revised list was subsequently reviewed by an international, multidisciplinary panel of expert stakeholders. Recommendations received during this pre-Delphi review were implemented to augment an initial draft glossary. The glossary was then critically evaluated and refined through two rounds of Delphi surveys and a virtual consensus meeting with all panel members as Delphi participants.

RESULTS

Forty-nine experts participated in the pre-Delphi survey, and 44 participated in the two-round Delphi process. Consensus was reached for 37 terms and definitions.

CONCLUSION

Uptake and utilization of this guideline collaboration glossary by key organizations and stakeholder groups may facilitate collaboration among guideline-producing organizations by improving communication, minimizing conflicts, and increasing guideline development efficiency.