We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
A systematic review of Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) in atopic dermatitis (AD) trials: Many options, no standards.
Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 2016 Februrary
BACKGROUND: Investigators often use global assessments to provide a snapshot of overall disease severity in dermatologic clinical trials. Although easy to perform, the frequency of use and standardization of global assessments in studies of atopic dermatitis (AD) is unclear.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the frequency, definitions, and methods of analysis of Investigator Global Assessment in randomized controlled trials of AD.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using all published randomized controlled trials of AD treatments in the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database (2000-2014). We determined the frequency of global scales application and defining features.
RESULTS: Among 317 trials identified, 101 trials (32%) used an investigator-performed global assessment as an outcome measure. There was large variability in global assessments between studies in nomenclature, scale size, definitions, outcome description, and analysis. Both static and dynamic scales were identified that ranged from 4- to 7-point scales. North American studies used global assessments more commonly than studies from other countries.
LIMITATIONS: The search was restricted to the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database.
CONCLUSION: Global assessments are used frequently in studies of AD, but their complete lack of standardized definitions and implementation preclude any meaningful comparisons between studies, which in turn impedes data synthesis to inform clinical decision-making. Standardization is urgently required.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the frequency, definitions, and methods of analysis of Investigator Global Assessment in randomized controlled trials of AD.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using all published randomized controlled trials of AD treatments in the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database (2000-2014). We determined the frequency of global scales application and defining features.
RESULTS: Among 317 trials identified, 101 trials (32%) used an investigator-performed global assessment as an outcome measure. There was large variability in global assessments between studies in nomenclature, scale size, definitions, outcome description, and analysis. Both static and dynamic scales were identified that ranged from 4- to 7-point scales. North American studies used global assessments more commonly than studies from other countries.
LIMITATIONS: The search was restricted to the Global Resource of Eczema Trials database.
CONCLUSION: Global assessments are used frequently in studies of AD, but their complete lack of standardized definitions and implementation preclude any meaningful comparisons between studies, which in turn impedes data synthesis to inform clinical decision-making. Standardization is urgently required.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app