Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,697

The DOI matches its OpenAlex record.

Clinical Classification of Cases of Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis, Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, and Erythema Multiforme

Sylvie Bastuji‐Garin·1993·Archives of Dermatology

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND DESIGN: To conduct a prospective case-control study about causative factors of severe bullous erythema multiforme, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis, we needed to define criteria for classifying the cases and standardize the collection of data so that cases could be reliably diagnosed according to this classification. Based on review of case histories and photographs of patients, a group of experts proposed a classification based on the pattern of erythema multiforme-like lesions (categorized as typical targets, raised or flat atypical targets, and purpuric macules) and on the extent of epidermal detachment. An atlas illustrating this classification that included photographs and schematic drawings was developed. We compared the evaluations of 28 cases by four nonphysicians relying on the atlas with the evaluations of the same cases by five experts not using the atlas to determine the usefulness of this atlas for classifying cases according to our nosologic schema. RESULTS: The following consensus classification in five categories was proposed: bullous erythema multiforme, detachment below 10% of the body surface area plus localized "typical targets" or "raised atypical targets"; Stevens-Johnson syndrome, detachment below 10% of the body surface area plus widespread erythematous or purpuric macules or flat atypical targets; overlap Stevens-Johnson syndrome-toxic epidermal necrolysis, detachment between 10% and 30% of the body surface area plus widespread purpuric macules or flat atypical targets; toxic epidermal necrolysis with spots, detachment above 30% of the body surface area plus widespread purpuric macules or flat atypical targets; and toxic epidermal necrolysis without spots, detachment above 10% of the body surface area with large epidermal sheets and without any purpuric macule or target. Using the atlas, the nonexperts showed excellent agreement with the experts. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that an illustrated atlas is a useful tool for standardizing the diagnosis of acute severe bullous disorders that are attributed to drugs or infectious agents. Whether the five categories proposed represent distinct etiopathologic entities will require further epidemiologic and laboratory investigations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

OpenAlex · 10.1001/archderm.129.1.92

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,697

Metadata

Authors
Bastuji‐Garin, S.
Venue
Archives of Dermatology
Publisher
American Medical Association
Published
1993-01-01
Volume
129
Issue
1
Pages
92-92
ISSN
0003-987X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2045391651
Cited by
1,697
References
0
FWCI
14.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical Classification of Cases of Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis, Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, and Erythema Multiforme. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archderm.129.1.92
The paper
Bastuji‐Garin, S. (1993). Clinical Classification of Cases of Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis, Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, and Erythema Multiforme. Archives of Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.129.1.92

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.