Format

Send to

Choose Destination
JAMA Dermatol. 2014 Sep;150(9):945-51. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2014.709.

Global burden of skin disease as reflected in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

Author information

1
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York.
2
Georgetown University School of Medicine, Washington, DC.
3
Centre of Evidence-Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham King's Meadow Campus, Nottingham, England.
4
Bruyere Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
5
Cochrane Skin Group, Dermatology Department, Queen's Medical Centre, University Hospital, Nottingham, England.
6
Peninsula Dental School, Plymouth University, Plymouth, England.
7
Institut für Informatik, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
8
International Foundation for Dermatology, London, England.
9
Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle.
10
Department of Dermatology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
11
Cochrane Editorial Unit, The Cochrane Collaboration, London, England.
12
Centre of Evidence-Based Dermatology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham, England.
13
Department of Dermatology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Denver14Department of Epidemiology, Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Denver15Dermatology Service, Department of Veterans Affairs Me.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE:

Research prioritization should be guided by impact of disease.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine whether systematic reviews and protocol topics in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) reflect disease burden, measured by disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2010 project.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:

Two investigators independently assessed 15 skin conditions in the CDSR for systematic review and protocol representation from November 1, 2013, to December 6, 2013. The 15 skin diseases were matched to their respective DALYs from GBD 2010. An official publication report of all reviews and protocols published by the Cochrane Skin Group (CSG) was also obtained to ensure that no titles were missed. There were no study participants other than the researchers, who worked with databases evaluating CDSR and GBD 2010 skin condition disability data.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:

Relationship of CDSR topic coverage (systematic reviews and protocols) with percentage of total 2010 DALYs, 2010 DALY rank, and DALY percentage change from 1990 to 2010 for 15 skin conditions.

RESULTS:

All 15 skin conditions were represented by at least 1 systematic review in CDSR; 69% of systematic reviews and 67% of protocols by the CSG covered the 15 skin conditions. Comparing the number of reviews/protocols and disability, dermatitis, melanoma, nonmelanoma skin cancer, viral skin diseases, and fungal skin diseases were well matched. Decubitus ulcer, psoriasis, and leprosy demonstrated review/protocol overrepresentation when matched with corresponding DALYs. In comparison, acne vulgaris, bacterial skin diseases, urticaria, pruritus, scabies, cellulitis, and alopecia areata were underrepresented in CDSR when matched with corresponding DALYs.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:

Degree of representation in CDSR is partly correlated with DALY metrics. The number of published reviews/protocols was well matched with disability metrics for 5 of the 15 studied skin diseases, while 3 skin diseases were overrepresented, and 7 were underrepresented. Our results provide high-quality and transparent data to inform future prioritization decisions.

PMID:
24807687
DOI:
10.1001/jamadermatol.2014.709
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Silverchair Information Systems
Loading ...
Support Center