<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Thorlacius L</submitter><funding>Region Zealand Research Foundation</funding><funding>AHRQ HHS</funding><funding>HCRW_</funding><funding>NIAMS NIH HHS</funding><funding>International Dermatology Outcome Measures (IDEOM)</funding><funding>Health and Care Research Wales</funding><funding>Oak Foundation</funding><pagination>715-721</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC5935265</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>178(3)</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>A core outcomes set (COS) is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials for a specific condition. Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) has no agreed-upon COS. A central aspect in the COS development process is to identify a set of candidate outcome domains from a long list of items. Our long list had been developed from patient interviews, a systematic review of the literature and a healthcare professional survey, and initial votes had been cast in two e-Delphi surveys. In this manuscript, we describe two in-person consensus meetings of Delphi participants designed to ensure an inclusive approach to generation of domains from related items.&lt;h4>Objectives&lt;/h4>To consider which items from a long list of candidate items to exclude</pubmed_abstract><journal>The British journal of dermatology</journal><pubmed_title>Towards global consensus on core outcomes for hidradenitis suppurativa research: an update from the HISTORIC consensus meetings I and II.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC5935265</pmcid><funding_grant_id>HCRW_HF-14-08</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>L30 AR072438</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>HF-14-08</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>K08 HS024585</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Prens EP</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gottlieb AB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Choon SE</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ardon C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Theut Riis P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Merola JF</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mehdizadeh A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Orgill D</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Christensen R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Dellavalle R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Davis M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Daham N</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gibbons A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Filippelli M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Matusiak L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Fernandez-Penas P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Guilbault S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bechara FG</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Grant T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Cohen AD</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Pallack L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Randell S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Rogers C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Garg A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Harvent C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Emtestam L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>van der Zee HH</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Okun M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Parks-Miller A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Thorlacius L</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ingram JR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Baba R</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kirby JS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Mojica T</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Harris C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Houston K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Rosen CF</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Jemec GBE</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gulliver S</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Villumsen B</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Towards global consensus on core outcomes for hidradenitis suppurativa research: an update from the HISTORIC consensus meetings I and II.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>A core outcomes set (COS) is an agreed minimum set of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials for a specific condition. Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) has no agreed-upon COS. A central aspect in the COS development process is to identify a set of candidate outcome domains from a long list of items. Our long list had been developed from patient interviews, a systematic review of the literature and a healthcare professional survey, and initial votes had been cast in two e-Delphi surveys. In this manuscript, we describe two in-person consensus meetings of Delphi participants designed to ensure an inclusive approach to generation of domains from related items.&lt;h4>Objectives&lt;/h4>To consider which items from a long list of candidate items to exclude</description><dates><release>2018-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2018 Mar</publication><modification>2025-04-26T07:44:54.562Z</modification><creation>2019-03-26T23:34:50Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC5935265</accession><cross_references><pubmed>29080368</pubmed><doi>10.1111/bjd.16093</doi></cross_references></HashMap>