Cited by 1,200Dermatology and Skin DiseasesReliability and Agreement in MeasurementContact Dermatitis and Allergies

The eczema area and severity index (EASI): assessment of reliability in atopic dermatitis

Hanifin, J. M., Thurston, M., Omoto, M., Cherill, R., Tofte, S. J., Graeber, M., Evaluator Group, The Easi·2001·Experimental Dermatology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To test the reliability of the eczema area and severity index (EASI) scoring system by assessing inter- and intra-observer consistency. DESIGN: Training of evaluators, application, and assessment over 2 consecutive days. SETTING: An academic center. PATIENTS: Twenty adults and children with atopic dermatitis (AD); cohort 1 (10 patients > or = 8 years) and cohort 2 (10 patients < 8 years). INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The EASI was used by 15 dermatologist evaluators to assess atopic dermatitis in cohort 1 and cohort 2 on 2 consecutive days. Inter- and intraobserver reliability were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall intra-evaluator reliability of the EASI was in the fair-to-good range. Inter-evaluator reliability analyses indicated that the evaluators assessed the patients consistently across both study days. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the EASI can be learned quickly and utilized reliably in the assessment of severity and extent of AD. There was consistency among the evaluators between consecutive days of evaluation. These results support the use of the EASI in clinical trials of therapeutic agents for AD.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1034/j.1600-0625.2001.100102.x

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hanifin, J. M., Thurston, M., Omoto, M., Cherill, R., Tofte, S. J., Graeber, M., & Evaluator Group, T. E.
Affiliations
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • Novartis (Switzerland) (CH)
  • Shiga University of Medical Science (JP)
Corresponding author
Hanifin, J. M.
Venue
Experimental Dermatology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2001-02
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
11-18
ISSN
  • 0906-6705 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0625
OpenAlex
W2117359358
Cited by
1,200
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 69 · 2025: 85 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 101 · 2022: 84 · 2021: 98 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 63 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 53 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 21
FWCI
20.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental Dermatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Dermatology and Skin Diseases
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
Keywords
Eczema Area and Severity Index, atopic dermatitis, inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability, disease severity assessment, disease extent assessment, clinical trial outcome measures
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Child, Preschool, Dermatitis, Atopic, Dermatology, Eczema, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Severity of Illness Index, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Observer Variation

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