Implementation of the HOME core outcome set for clinical trials of atopic eczema-barriers and opportunities: the HOME IX meeting report.

The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative established a core outcome set (COS) for atopic eczema (AE) clinical trials in 2019. This set encompasses four core outcome domains and corresponding measurement instruments: clinical signs (EASI), patient-reported symptoms (POEM and NRS 11 point for worst itch over the last 24 h), quality of life (DLQI/CDLQI/IDQoLI), and long-term control (Recap or ADCT). Following its roadmap, the HOME initiative is now focused on supporting implementation of the COS. To identify barriers and facilitators to implementation of the COS, and to guide the effort to promote COS uptake, a virtual consensus meeting was held over 2 days (September 25-26, 2021) attended by 55 participants (26 healthcare professionals, 16 methodologists, 5 patients, 4 industry representatives, and 4 students). Implementation themes were identified by a pre-meeting survey distributed to HOME members, presentations, and whole-group discussion. Participants were divided into five multi-professional small groups which ranked their top 3 most important themes, followed by whole-group discussion and anonymous consensus voting (consensus criteria: < 30% disagreement). Three most important implementation themes were identified and agreed upon: (1) awareness and stakeholder engagement, (2) universal applicability of the COS, and (3) ensuring minimum administrative burden. Working groups to address these issues are now a priority for the HOME initiative. The results from this meeting will inform the development of a HOME Implementation Roadmap in an effort to support other COS groups planning for effective implementation of their core sets.

Artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms for early detection of skin cancer in community and primary care settings: a systematic review.

Skin cancers occur commonly worldwide. The prognosis and disease burden are highly dependent on the cancer type and disease stage at diagnosis. We systematically reviewed studies on artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) algorithms that aim to facilitate the early diagnosis of skin cancers, focusing on their application in primary and community care settings. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science (from Jan 1, 2000, to Aug 9, 2021) for all studies providing evidence on applying AI/ML algorithms to the early diagnosis of skin cancer, including all study designs and languages. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy of the algorithms for skin cancers. The secondary outcomes included an overview of AI/ML methods, evaluation approaches, cost-effectiveness, and acceptability to patients and clinicians. We identified 14 224 studies. Only two studies used data from clinical settings with a low prevalence of skin cancers. We reported data from all 272 studies that could be relevant in primary care. The primary outcomes showed reasonable mean diagnostic accuracy for melanoma (89·5% [range 59·7-100%]), squamous cell carcinoma (85·3% [71·0-97·8%]), and basal cell carcinoma (87·6% [70·0-99·7%]). The secondary outcomes showed a heterogeneity of AI/ML methods and study designs, with high amounts of incomplete reporting (eg, patient demographics and methods of data collection). Few studies used data on populations with a low prevalence of skin cancers to train and test their algorithms; therefore, the widespread adoption into community and primary care practice cannot currently be recommended until efficacy in these populations is shown. We did not identify any health economic, patient, or clinician acceptability data for any of the included studies. We propose a methodological checklist for use in the development of new AI/ML algorithms to detect skin cancer, to facilitate their design, evaluation, and implementation.

Eczema Care Online: development and qualitative optimisation of an online behavioural intervention to support self-management in young people with eczema.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the development of Eczema Care Online (ECO), an online behaviour change intervention for young people with eczema (phase I); and explore and optimise the acceptability of ECO among this target group using think-aloud interviews (phase II). METHODS: Theory-based, evidence-based and person-based approaches to intervention development were used. In phase I, a qualitative systematic review and qualitative interviews developed an in-depth understanding of the needs and challenges of young people with eczema. Guiding principles highlighted key intervention design objectives and features to address the needs of this target group to maximise user engagement. Behavioural analysis and logic modelling developed ECO's hypothesised programme theory. In phase II, qualitative think-aloud interviews were carried out with 28 young people with eczema and the intervention was optimised based on their feedback. RESULTS: The final intervention aimed to reduce eczema severity by supporting treatment use (emollients, topical corticosteroids/topical calcineurin inhibitors), management of irritants/triggers, emotional management and reducing scratching. Generally, young people expressed positive views of intervention content and design in think-aloud interviews. Quotes and stories from other young people with eczema and ECO's focus on living with eczema (not just topical treatments) were valuable for normalising eczema. Young people believed ECO addressed knowledge gaps they had from childhood and the safety information about topical corticosteroids was reassuring. Negative feedback was used to modify ECO. CONCLUSIONS: A prototype of the ECO intervention was developed using rigorous and complementary intervention development approaches. Subsequent think-aloud interviews helped optimise the intervention, demonstrated ECO is likely to be acceptable to this target group, and provided support for our guiding principles including key design objectives and features to consider when developing interventions for this population. A randomised controlled trial and process evaluation of the intervention is underway to assess effectiveness and explore user engagement with the intervention's behavioural goals.

Avoidable research waste in dermatology: what are the solutions?

In the last editorial, I provided examples of research waste in dermatology and suggested that it was due to a system failure rather than just a few "bad apples". Here, I focus on possible solutions, mainly in relation to clinical trials, building on examples from work at the Centre of Evidence-Based Dermatology (CEBD) and other research groups.

Classifying atopic dermatitis: a systematic review of phenotypes and associated characteristics.

Atopic dermatitis is a heterogeneous disease, accompanied by a wide variation in disease presentation and the potential to identify many phenotypes that may be relevant for prognosis and treatment. We aimed to systematically review previously reported phenotypes of atopic dermatitis and any characteristics associated with them. Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science were searched from inception till 12 February 2021 for studies attempting to classify atopic dermatitis. Primary outcomes are atopic dermatitis phenotypes and characteristics associated with them in subsequent analyses. A secondary outcome is the methodological approach used to derive them. In total, 8511 records were found. By focussing only on certain clinical phenotypes, 186 studies were eligible for inclusion. The majority of studies were hospital-based (59%, 109/186) and cross-sectional (76%, 141/186). The number of included patients ranged from seven to 526 808. Data-driven approaches to identify phenotypes were only used in a minority of studies (7%, 13/186). Ninety-one studies (49%) investigated a phenotype based on disease severity. A phenotype based on disease trajectory, morphology and eczema herpeticum was investigated in 56 (30%), 22 (12%) and 11 (6%) studies respectively. Thirty-six studies (19%) investigated morphological characteristics in other phenotypes. Investigated associated characteristics differed between studies. In conclusion, we present an overview of phenotype definitions used in literature for severity, trajectory, morphology and eczema herpeticum, including associated characteristics. There is a lack of uniform and consistent use of atopic dermatitis phenotypes across studies.

Recommended core outcome instruments for health-related quality of life, long-term control and itch intensity in atopic eczema trials: results of the HOME VII consensus meeting.

BACKGROUND: The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has established a core outcome set of domains for atopic eczema (AE) clinical trials. Previous consensus meetings have agreed on preferred instruments for clinician-reported signs (Eczema Area and Severity Index, EASI) and patient-reported symptoms (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure, POEM). This paper reports consensus decisions from the HOME VII meeting. OBJECTIVES: To complete the core outcome set for AE by agreeing on core outcome instruments for the domains of quality of life (QoL), long-term control and itch intensity. METHODS: A face-to-face consensus meeting was held in Tokyo, Japan (8-10 April 2019) including 75 participants (49 healthcare professionals/methodologists, 14 patients, 12 industry representatives) from 16 countries. Consensus decisions were made by presentations of evidence, followed by whole and small group discussions and anonymous voting using predefined consensus rules. RESULTS: It was agreed by consensus that QoL should be measured using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) for adults, the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) for children and the Infant's Dermatology Quality of Life Index (IDQoL) for infants. For long-term control, the Recap of Atopic Eczema (RECAP) instrument or the Atopic Dermatitis Control Test (ADCT) should be used. Consensus was not reached over the frequency of data collection for long-term control. The peak itch numerical rating scale (NRS)-11 past 24 h was recommended as an additional instrument for the symptom domain in trials of older children and adults. Agreement was reached that all core outcome instruments should be captured at baseline and at the time of primary outcome assessment as a minimum. CONCLUSIONS: For now, the core outcome set for clinical trials in AE is complete. The specified domains and instruments should be used in all new clinical trials and systematic reviews of eczema treatments.

Interventions for basal cell carcinoma: abridged Cochrane systematic review and GRADE assessments.

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common cancer affecting white-skinned individuals, and the worldwide incidence is increasing. Although rarely fatal, BCC is associated with significant morbidity and costs. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions for primary BCC in immunocompetent adults. METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to November 2019: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and LILACS. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. RESULTS: We included 52 randomized controlled trials with 6990 participants (median age 65 years; range 20-95). Mean study duration was 13 months (range 6 weeks-10 years). Ninety-two per cent (n = 48/52) of studies exclusively included histologically low-risk BCC (nodular and superficial subtypes). The certainty of evidence was predominantly low or moderate for the outcomes of interest. Overall, surgical interventions have the lowest recurrence rates, and there may be slightly fewer recurrences with Mohs micrographic surgery over surgical excision for primary, facial BCC (high-risk histological subtype or located in the 'H-zone' or both) (low-certainty evidence). Nonsurgical treatments, when used for low-risk BCC, are less effective than surgical treatments, but recurrence rates are acceptable and cosmetic outcomes are probably superior. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical interventions have lower recurrence rates and remain the gold standard for high-risk BCC. Of the nonsurgical treatments, topical imiquimod has the best evidence to support its efficacy for low-risk BCC. Priorities for future research include agreement on core outcome measures and studies with longer follow-up.

Can atopic eczema and psoriasis coexist? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Importance: Previous studies report both coexistence and mutual exclusivity of atopic eczema (AE) and psoriasis, but these have not been appraised systematically. Knowledge of such disease association throws light on disease mechanisms and may influence therapeutic choices. Objective: To summarise evidence for AE and psoriasis occurring in the same person at the same point in time. Planned primary outcome was the incidence, prevalence or risk of psoriasis or eczema. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid Embase were searched from inception to 1st February 2020. The search strategy was built around the key terms 'atopic eczema', 'psoriasis' and 'co-existence'. Observational studies (cohort, case-control, cross-sectional and case-series) with a minimum of 10 consecutive patients were included. There were no restrictions on participants, geography or language. Studies were selected, data extracted and critically appraised by two independent reviewers. Data were extracted on the method of diagnosis: health professional (dermatologist, criteria, other), self-reported, not specified. Study quality was assessed using validated Joanna Brigg's Institute critical appraisal tools. A random-effects model was used to combine studies. The effect of study quality on the pooled estimate was investigated using stratification. Heterogeneity was explored by subgroup analysis. Results: This review included 31 studies and 20 523 individuals with psoriasis and 1 405 911 with AE. Eight studies reported the prevalence of AE in those with psoriasis and values ranged from 0.17% to 20%: the pooled prevalence was 2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1, 3). Seven studies reported the prevalence of psoriasis in those with AE and values ranged from 0.3% to 12.6%; the pooled prevalence was 2% (95% CI: 1, 3). Ten studies were assessed as low risk of bias. Geographical area, method of diagnosis, setting and whether the assessment of diagnosis was blinded, partly contributed to the heterogeneity. Conclusions: This review provides some evidence for the coexistence of AE and psoriasis. Clinicians should be aware of coexistence at diagnosis, when selecting therapies and when reviewing poor response to treatment.

Outcome assessment in dermatology clinical trials and cochrane reviews: call for a dermatology-specific outcome taxonomy.

BACKGROUND: Standardized outcome reporting is crucial for trial evidence synthesis and translation of findings into clinical decision-making. The OMERACT 2.0 Filter and COMET outcome domain taxonomy propose frameworks for consistent reporting of outcomes. There is an absence of a uniform dermatology-specific reporting strategy that uses precise and consistent outcome definitions. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to map efficacy/effectiveness outcomes assessed in dermatological trials to the OMERACT 2.0 Filter as a starting point for developing an outcome taxonomy in dermatology. METHODS: We critically appraised 10 Cochrane Skin Reviews randomly selected from all 69 Cochrane Skin Reviews published until 01/2015 and the 220 trials included covering a broad spectrum of dermatological conditions and interventions. Efficacy/effectiveness outcomes were mapped to core areas and domains according to the OMERACT 2.0 Filter. The extracted trial outcomes were used for critical appraisal of outcome reporting in dermatology trials and for the preliminary development of a dermatology-specific outcome taxonomy. RESULTS: The allocation of 1086 extracted efficacy/effectiveness outcomes to the OMERACT 2.0 Filter resulted in a hierarchically structured dermatology-specific outcome classification. In 506 outcomes (47%), the outcome concept to be measured was insufficiently described, hindering meaningful evidence synthesis. Although the core areas assessed in different dermatology trials of the same condition overlap considerably, quantitative evidence synthesis usually failed due to imprecise outcome definitions, non-comparable outcome measurement instruments, metrics and reporting. CONCLUSIONS: We present an efficacy/effectiveness outcome classification as a starting point for a dermatology-specific taxonomy to provide trialists and reviewers with the opportunity to better synthesize and compare evidence.

An economic evaluation of the randomized controlled trial of topical corticosteroid and home-based narrowband ultraviolet B for active and limited vitiligo (the HI-Light Vitiligo Trial).

BACKGROUND: Economic evidence for vitiligo treatments is absent. OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-effectiveness of (i) handheld narrowband ultraviolet B (NB-UVB) and (ii) a combination of topical corticosteroid (TCS) and NB-UVB compared with TCS alone for localized vitiligo. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a pragmatic, three-arm, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial with 9 months' treatment. In total 517 adults and children (aged ≥ 5 years) with active vitiligo affecting < 10% of skin were recruited from secondary care and the community and were randomized 1: 1: 1 to receive TCS, NB-UVB or both. Cost per successful treatment (measured on the Vitiligo Noticeability Scale) was estimated. Secondary cost-utility analyses measured quality-adjusted life-years using the EuroQol 5 Dimensions 5 Levels for those aged ≥ 11 years and the Child Health Utility 9D for those aged 5 to < 18 years. The trial was registered with number ISRCTN17160087 on 8 January 2015. RESULTS: The mean ± SD cost per participant was £775 ± 83·7 for NB-UVB, £813 ± 111.4 for combination treatment and £600 ± 96·2 for TCS. In analyses adjusted for age and target patch location, the incremental difference in cost for combination treatment compared with TCS was £211 (95% confidence interval 188-235), corresponding to a risk difference of 10·9% (number needed to treat = 9). The incremental cost was £1932 per successful treatment. The incremental difference in cost for NB-UVB compared with TCS was £173 (95% confidence interval 151-196), with a risk difference of 5·2% (number needed to treat = 19). The incremental cost was £3336 per successful treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Combination treatment, compared with TCS alone, has a lower incremental cost per additional successful treatment than NB-UVB only. Combination treatment would be considered cost-effective if decision makers are willing to pay £1932 per additional treatment success.

Dermatological games: Part 2. What has changed 40 years on?

In this two-part report, we review and critically appraise 'Dermatological games' by J. A. Cotterill, a seminal article published in 1981, which attempted to explain the interaction between dermatologists and patients using Berne's game theory. Part 1 described and critically appraised the educational value of Cotterill's original list of games in relation to how they apply to dermatology practice. In Part 2, a list of new 'games' that might be observed in current dermatological practice is introduced. The relevance of Cotterill's paper and an explanation for why his article remains relevant to dermatology practice and training today is scrutinized, in order to stimulate discussion and improve patient care.

Dermatological games: Part 1. Original description and critique.

'Dermatological games' by J. A. Cotterill was a seminal article published in 1981, which attempted to explain the interaction between dermatologists and patients using Berne's game theory. In Part 1 of this series of two reviews, we review Cotterill's original list of games and how they applied to dermatology in the context of when they were written. We then critically appraise Cotterill's article and arguments. Although the article was deliberately provocative, we found Cotterill's arguments to be well-structured and logical, and the 'games' described are well-conceived. Cotterill's candid analysis of doctors' motivations and the potential impact on the patient is refreshing and insightful. It is striking that, 40 years on, many of the original 'games' described remain recognizable in current practice. In Part 2, a list of new 'games' that might be observed in modern dermatological practice is introduced. The relevance of Cotterill's paper and an explanation for why his educational article remains relevant to dermatology practice and training today is scrutinized in order to stimulate discussion, promote education and improve patient care.

Randomized controlled trial of topical corticosteroid and home-based narrowband ultraviolet B for active and limited vitiligo: results of the HI-Light Vitiligo Trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for the effectiveness of vitiligo treatments is limited. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of (i) handheld narrowband UVB (NB-UVB) and (ii) a combination of potent topical corticosteroid (TCS) and NB-UVB, compared with TCS alone, for localized vitiligo. METHODS: A pragmatic, three-arm, placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial (9-month treatment, 12-month follow-up). Adults and children, recruited from secondary care and the community, aged ≥ 5 years and with active vitiligo affecting < 10% of skin, were randomized 1 : 1 : 1 to receive TCS (mometasone furoate 0·1% ointment + dummy NB-UVB), NB-UVB (NB-UVB + placebo TCS) or a combination (TCS + NB-UVB). TCS was applied once daily on alternating weeks; NB-UVB was administered on alternate days in escalating doses, adjusted for erythema. The primary outcome was treatment success at 9 months at a target patch assessed using the participant-reported Vitiligo Noticeability Scale, with multiple imputation for missing data. The trial was registered with number ISRCTN17160087 on 8 January 2015. RESULTS: In total 517 participants were randomized to TCS (n = 173), NB-UVB (n = 169) and combination (n = 175). Primary outcome data were available for 370 (72%) participants. The proportions with target patch treatment success were 17% (TCS), 22% (NB-UVB) and 27% (combination). Combination treatment was superior to TCS: adjusted between-group difference 10·9% (95% confidence interval 1·0%-20·9%; P = 0·032; number needed to treat = 10). NB-UVB alone was not superior to TCS: adjusted between-group difference 5·2% (95% CI - 4·4% to 14·9%; P = 0·29; number needed to treat = 19). Participants using interventions with ≥ 75% expected adherence were more likely to achieve treatment success, but the effects were lost once treatment stopped. Localized grade 3 or 4 erythema was reported in 62 (12%) participants (including three with dummy light). Skin thinning was reported in 13 (2·5%) participants (including one with placebo ointment). CONCLUSIONS: Combination treatment with home-based handheld NB-UVB plus TCS is likely to be superior to TCS alone for treatment of localized vitiligo. Combination treatment was relatively safe and well tolerated but was successful in only around one-quarter of participants.

Scoping the international impact from four independent national dermatology trials.

BACKGROUND: Research impact describes whether and how research results in wider benefits to society beyond academic publication. Little is known about translation of clinical trial research into dermatological practice. AIM: We scoped international impact from four independently funded clinical trials published by our group over the past 10 years. METHODS: This was a scoping survey of 35 international colleagues from 22 countries followed by a narrative summary of emergent themes. RESULTS: All recipients kindly responded to the survey. At least 20 emergent themes were identified, which broadly included: (i) interest and enthusiasm in the concept of trying to document clinical trial impact; (ii) direct impacts such as adoption of the drug as tested and recommended from the trial results, including more confidence using the drug in slightly different ways for the same condition; (iii) the finding that trial impact was dependent on factors such as drug availability and country-specific disease patterns; and (iv) the educational value of good trial design for journal club discussions and improving future clinical trial designs in dermatology. Our survey suggests that uptake into clinical practice was surprisingly rapid and widespread. CONCLUSION: Clinical trial research is of little use unless findings are translated into clinical practice for patient benefit. Our international scoping survey suggests that independent clinical trials that address important questions identified by the dermatology community have substantial, diverse and far-reaching impacts on dermatological practice.

Recommended core outcome instruments for health-related quality of life, long-term control and itch intensity in atopic eczema trials: results of the HOME VII consensus meeting.

BACKGROUND: The Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative has established a core outcome set of domains for atopic eczema clinical trials. Previous consensus meetings have agreed upon preferred instruments for clinician-reported signs (Eczema Area and Severity Index - EASI) and patient-reported symptoms (Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure - POEM). This paper reports consensus decisions from the HOME VII meeting. OBJECTIVE: To complete the core outcome set for atopic eczema by agreeing upon core outcome instruments for the domains of quality of life, long-term control and itch intensity. METHODS: Face-to-face consensus meeting held in Tokyo, Japan (8th to 10th April, 2019) including 74 participants (47 healthcare professionals/methodologists, 14 patients, 13 industry representatives), from 16 countries. Consensus decisions were made by presentations of evidence, followed by whole and small group discussions and anonymous voting using pre-defined consensus rules. RESULTS: It was agreed by consensus that quality of life should be measured using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) for adults, the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) for children, and the Infant's Dermatology Quality of Life Index (IDQoL) for infants. For long-term control, the Recap of Atopic Eczema (RECAP) instrument or the Atopic Dermatitis Control Test (ADCT) should be used. Consensus was not reached over the frequency of data collection for long-term control. The peak itch numerical rating scale(NRS)-11 past 24 hours was recommended as an additional instrument for the symptom domain in trials of older children and adults. Agreement was reached that all core outcome instruments should be captured at baseline and at the time of primary outcome assessment as a minimum. CONCLUSIONS: For now, the core outcome set for clinical trials in atopic eczema is complete. The specified domains and instruments should be used in all new clinical trials and systematic reviews of eczema treatments.

A self-report questionnaire to detect hand dermatitis in nurses.

BACKGROUND: Hand dermatitis is highly prevalent among nurses due to their frequent exposure to wet work. Providing cost-effective dermatological health surveillance for this occupational group presents a challenge to health service providers. AIMS: To ascertain the predictive value of nurses' self-assessment of whether they had current hand dermatitis using a screening questionnaire when compared with the assessment made by a dermatologist of the nurses' hand photographs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study comparing the self-report decision made by student and intensive care nurses using a single hand dermatitis screening question with the clinical assessment of their hand photographs made by dermatologists using a standardized photographic guide. RESULTS: We analysed data collected at study baseline (n = 1599). The results showed that the screening question had a high negative predictive value (91%; 95% CI 89-93), but a low positive predictive value (39%; 95% CI 34-45). It demonstrated acceptable accuracy in distinguishing those with and without the disease (area under the receiver operator curve = 0.7) and had a high specificity (86%; 95% CI 84-88) but a sensitivity of only 52% (95% CI 46-59) in identifying hand dermatitis. CONCLUSIONS: We found that nurses were able to accurately self-assess themselves as not having any signs of hand dermatitis. By contrast, they were less able to accurately self-assess positive cases suggesting under-recognition of early disease. We propose that a questionnaire containing a single hand dermatitis screening question should be considered as a tool for screening out clear cases as part of a workplace health surveillance programme for detecting hand dermatitis.

Strengths and limitations of the United Kingdom Working Party criteria for atopic dermatitis in adults.

BACKGROUND: The United Kingdom Working Party's (UKWP) criteria were developed to improve epidemiological research in atopic dermatitis (AD), but have not been validated in an exclusively adult European population. OBJECTIVE: To validate the UKWP criteria for AD in adults. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, three independent samples of adult individuals were drawn and interviewed: patients with a hospital diagnosis of AD or plaque psoriasis in adulthood, and general population controls. Various versions of the UKWP criteria for AD were utilized. RESULTS: A total of 3490 (general population), 3834 (AD) and 4016 (psoriasis) adult individuals were enrolled in the study. The best combination of the UKWP criteria leads to a sensitivity of 0.71 and a specificity of 0.96 in the general population. The criteria better captured 'AD ever' compared with 'AD within the past 12 months' and had a higher sensitivity in patients with moderate (87.2-97.7%) or severe (95.8-100%) AD at the time of interview compared with those who where asymptomatic (12.6-36.8%). The UKWP criteria also captured high proportions of psoriasis patients (19.7-47.7%) when applied in a cohort of unique psoriasis patients. CONCLUSIONS: It remains a challenge to accurately diagnose a history of AD in adulthood since symptoms are shared with other skin conditions and AD may have resolved or can be waxing and waning, in turn leading to recall bias. The UKWP criteria performed well in the general population for the purpose of determining the prevalence, but should be used cautiously when studying comorbidity.