Outcome measure instruments for the assessment and treatment of androgenetic alopecia: A scoping review

Clicks: 4
ID: 318301
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #176 of 183 articles by views in clinical and experimental dermatology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 183 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract Condition-specific outcome measure instruments (OMIs) are essential for assessing severity and evaluating response to emerging treatments. This scoping review identified OMIs used in assessing and treating androgenetic alopecia (AGA). Among 317 studies involving 194,158 individuals, 12 clinician-reported OMIs were identified, used in 51.7% of studies, including 31% of clinical trials. Hamilton-Norwood (23.9%) and Ludwig (20%) were the most used ClinROMs in AGA clinical trials, for male-pattern and female-pattern hair loss, respectively. The Men Hair Growth Questionnaire (MHGQ) was the most frequently used patient-reported severity assessment instrument in clinical trials (4.1%). The Women’s Androgenetic Alopecia Quality of Life (WAA-QoL) and Hairdex were the only identified HRQoL instruments, used in 5.9% and 1.4% of clinical trials, respectively. Condition-specific OMIs are inconsistently applied across AGA clinical trials. Patient-reported instruments have remained underutilized. Our results underscore the need for consensus-based harmonization towards standardized assessment of AGA. Psychometric evaluation of existing instruments is also essential.
Reference Key
openalex_W7165690267 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Emadodin Darchini-Maragheh, Gia Toan Tang, Rodney Sinclair
Journal clinical and experimental dermatology
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/ced/llag267
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/ced/llag267
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.