This is a cross-sectional analysis of spin in randomized controlled trial (RCT) abstracts published in top-ranked obesity and general medicine journals. The top seven obesity and four general medicine journals were searched from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2017. To be included in this study, a trial must be an RCT with non-significant primary endpoint (P > 0.05), exclusively randomize subjects with overweight or obesity or have a primary endpoint of weight loss. These studies were analysed by two reviewers for spin in the abstract.The primary endpoint of our investigation was the frequency and type of spin. The secondary endpoint was to assess whether funding source was associated with the presence of spin. Our PubMed search yielded 1143 articles. Primary screening excluded 992 articles, and fulltext evaluation excluded an additional 106. Overall, 45 articles were included. Spin was identified in 21 of the 45 (46.7%) abstracts analysed. Evidence of spin was found in 17 (37.8%) abstract result sections and 11 (24.4%) abstract conclusion sections. Of the 39 RCTs reporting a clinical trial registry, 6 (15.4%) had evidence of selective reporting bias. Our study found that obesity medicine RCTs from top-ranked journals with non-significant primary endpoints published in 2016 and 2017 frequently have spin in their abstracts. Abstracts with evidence of spin may influence a reader's perception of new drugs or procedures. These results warrant a careful review of future RCTs, but may not be generalizable to RCTs published in lower-ranked journals. K E Y W O R D S bariatric surgery, cross-sectional review, obesity, weight loss therapy

This is the first study to systematically evaluate all published dermatology-specific (for use across skin conditions), patient-reported outcome measures against the goldstandard Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) criteria and make evidence-based recommendations for their use. The study found that no dermatology-specific patient-reported outcome measure can be unequivocally recommended for use. These results question the validity of the data collected using these patient-reported outcome measures, which has implications for clinical decision-making and research. By relying on data from existing patient-reported outcome measures of quality of life, the true impact of skin conditions on patients' lives may be underestimated. This study systematically reviewed all dermatologyspecific (used across skin conditions) patient-reported outcome measures and makes evidence-based recommendations for their use. The study protocol is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018108829). PubMed, PsycInfo and CINAHL were searched from inception to 25 June 2018. The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COS-MIN) criteria were used to assess the measurement properties and methodological quality of studies. A total of 12,925 abstracts were identified. Zero patientreported outcome measures were assigned to category A (ready for use without further validation), 31 to category B (recommended for use, but only with further validation) and 5 to category C (not recommended for use). There is no gold-standard dermatology-specific patient-reported outcome measure that can be recommended or used without caution. A new measure that can comprehensively capture the impact of dermatological conditions on the patient's life is needed.

Existing patient-reported outcome measures cannot comprehensively capture the full impact of living with a dermatological condition. The aim of this study was to develop a conceptual framework on which to build a new Patient-Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure. Adults (≥ 18 years of age) living with a dermatological condition, worldwide and/or representatives from a patient organization [AQ2] via a global patient organization network, were invited to an individual or group interview. Data were analysed thematically. Sixty-five people from 29 countries, representing 29 dermatological conditions, participated. Key themes were: (i) impacts at the individual, organizational and societal levels; (ii) impacts were point-in-time and cumulative; and (iii) impact is a multifaceted construct, with 2 subthemes (iiia) common impacts and (iiib) psychological and social impacts are most significant. The conceptual framework shows that impact is a multifaceted concept presenting across physical, psychological, social, financial, daily functioning and healthcare, and provides the basis for co-constructing the PRIDD with patients.

Introduction: Patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) experience burdensome symptoms and impaired quality of life (QoL). The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of topical AD therapies on disease control, physician and patient treatment satisfaction, and QoL in a real-world setting. Methods: This was a retrospective, point-intime study of physician-completed medical records and patient surveys drawn from two Adelphi AD Disease Specific Programmes TM (1. adults C 18 years old; 2. pediatrics B 17 years old) in the USA. Eligible physicians completed patient record forms and provided disease control assessments. Physicians and matched patients were surveyed regarding their satisfaction with current treatment. Patient-reported outcomes included the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Children's DLQI (CDLQI), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), and

No abstract