Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 19;2021(4):CD011535. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011535.pub4

Goldfarb 1988.

Study characteristics
Methods RCT, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind
Date of study: not stated
Location: not stated
Participants Randomised: 38 participants (mean age 45 ‐ 48 years, 31 male)
Inclusion criteria
  • BSA 10 ‐ 70


Exclusion criteria
  • No women of childbearing potential


Dropouts and withdrawals
  • 0/38 (0%)

Interventions Intervention
A. Acitretin (n = 10), orally, 10 ‐ 25 mg/day, 8 weeks
B. Acitretin (n = 16), orally, 50 ‐ 75 mg/day, 8 weeks
Control intervention
C. Placebo (n = 12), orally, daily, 8 weeks
Outcomes Assessments at 8 weeks
Primary outcomes of the trial
  • Not stated


Outcomes of the trial
  • Percentage of skin involvement with psoriasis

  • Overall scaling, erythema, thickness, and global extent of the disease on a 0 through 6 scale

  • Improvement range from worse/unchanged/fair/good/excellent

  • AEs

Notes Funding sources, quote (p 655): "Supported in part by Hoffman‐La Roche Inc., Nutley, NJ, and the Babcock Dermatologic Endowment"
Declarations of interest: not stated
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Quote (p 656): "21 patients were randomly and equally divided into 4 groups"
Comment: no description of the method used to generate the sequence generation
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Quote (p 656): "21 patients were randomly and equally divided into 4 groups"
Comment: no description of the method used to guarantee allocation concealment
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes High risk Quote (p 656): "we have studied 38 patients in a double‐blind fashion"
Comment: visible side effect of acitretin
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes High risk Quote (p 656): "we have studied 38 patients in a double‐blind fashion"
Comment: visible side effect of acitretin
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes Unclear risk Randomly assigned 38, analysed 38
No mention of how the missing data were managed
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Comment: no protocol was available.
The prespecified outcomes mentioned in the Methods section appeared to have been reported