Cited by 389Dermatology and Skin DiseasesContact Dermatitis and AllergiesAsthma and respiratory diseases

What are the best outcome measurements for atopic eczema? A systematic review

Schmitt, Jochen, Langan, Sinead, Williams, Hywel C.·2007·Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

Abstract

Background Valid and reliable outcome measurements are a prerequisite for evidence-based practice. The comparative validity and reliability of outcome measurements for assessing atopic eczema (AE) severity is unclear.Objective We sought to assess the validity, reliability, sensitivity to change, and ease of use of outcome measurements for AE. We also sought to give recommendations on which outcomes to use in clinical research and for clinical monitoring.Methods We performed a systematic review and survey of clinical experts and patients.Results Twenty published outcome measurements were identified. There is evidence of adequate construct validity for 3 measurements (Severity Scoring of Atopic Dermatitis index [SCORAD], Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI], and Three Item Severity Score), adequate internal consistency of 1 scale (Patient-oriented Eczema Measure [POEM]), adequate interobserver reliability of 5 measurements (Basic Clinical Scoring System; Nottingham Eczema Severity Score; Objective Severity Assessment of Atopic Dermatitis; Six Area, Six Sign Atopic Dermatitis severity score; and SCORAD), adequate test-retest reliability of 1 scale (POEM), and adequate sensitivity to change of 3 measurements (EASI, SCORAD, and Investigators' Global Atopic Dermatitis Assessment). Most outcome measurements have adequate content validity, as assessed by patients and experts. Data on the time to perform the assessment was identified for 8 outcome measurements. Only SCORAD, EASI, and POEM have been tested sufficiently and performed adequately.Conclusion There are too many published outcome measures for AE. Most have not been tested properly or perform adequately when tested, and their continued use hampers scientific communication.Clinical implications Only SCORAD, EASI, and POEM currently perform adequately. These scales should be used in future studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jaci.2007.08.011

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 63 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schmitt, J., Langan, S., & Williams, H. C.
Affiliations
  • University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus (DE)
  • Queen's Medical Centre (GB)
Corresponding author
Schmitt, Jochen
Venue
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-12
Volume
120
Issue
6
Pages
1389-1398
ISSN
0091-6749 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977571789
Cited by
388
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 22
FWCI
2.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatology and Skin Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Asthma and respiratory diseases
Keywords
atopic dermatitis, outcome measures, disease severity assessment, SCORAD, Eczema Area and Severity Index, Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, construct validity, reliability statistics, sensitivity to change, inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, content validity, patient monitoring
MeSH terms
Dermatitis, Atopic, Humans, Outcome Assessment, Health Care

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