Evidence mapPaperPMID 39078087Full record

SynthesisJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV2025

A systematic review of sex and gender differences in treatment outcome of inflammatory skin diseases: Is it time for new guidelines?

S Preis, S Ziehfreund, T Biedermann, S Horster, A Zink

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Towards Personalised Therapy in Chronic Spontaneous Urticaria: Advancing From Endotype to Clinical Response.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

S PreisDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1830-3830
S ZiehfreundDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3176-1120
T BiedermannDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
S HorsterDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany.
A ZinkDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, TUM School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9313-6588

Funding

Department of Dermatology and Allergy, School of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGender- and sex-specific differences in medicine were long-time disregarded. Despite numerous indications of gender- and sex-specific influences on the treatment of dermatological conditions, these have not yet been systematically investigated.

objectivesTo meet this unmet need, we conducted the present systematic review on the topic of gender and sex differences in the treatement outcome of skin diseases.

methodsEmbase (via Ovid), PubMed Medline and Web of Science were searched, in between January 2001 and December 2022. English and german randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective cohorts and case-control studies that examined differences between men and women in treatment outcomes of skin diseases were included.

resultsTwo authors independently screened the reports for eligibility, one extracted all data (the second double-checked) and critically appraised the quality and risk of bias of the studies. Eighty-three reports were included. The largest share of the identified publications focused on gender differences in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (n = 49), followed by melanoma (n = 8) and sporadic studies (n < 5) of inflammatory, infectious and autoimmune skin diseases. The main topics in which gender differences could be identified were choice of treatment, time to initiation of treatment, therapy response, adverse events, adherence and treatment satisfaction. For psoriasis, gender differences could be found in all aspects, while for the other skin diseases specific publications on gender differences are still missing.

conclusionsThis systematic review shows numerous gender differences but also reveals major gaps in gender-specific care in dermatology which should be narrowed in the upcoming years to optimize a patient-centred, individualized, gender-equal healthcare. PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022306626.

Indexed as

Skin DiseasesFemaleHumansMalePractice Guidelines as TopicPsoriasisSex FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID39078087
PMCPMC11851263

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.