Lee, AlbertAlbertLeeChuh, A. A. T.Zawar, V.Sciallis, G.Kempf, W.2025-12-082025-12-082005https://repository.sfu.edu.hk/handle/sfu/5270The exact aetiology of pityriasis rosea (PR) remains controversial despite research for nearly one and a half century. We report a small-scale qualitative study on the historical aspects of PR. We found that the exact time point for which the rash was first accurately described is not easily determined. There exists considerable overlap between typical and atypical PR. Important clinical signs of PR such as the herald patch and peripheral collarette scaling were recognised decades after the disease had been accurately described. Early investigators utilised not only laboratory data but also epidemiological data in their analyses. Investigators often focused on physician-oriented rather than patient-oriented aspects. These findings have pertinent implications on the future directions of research for PR. 雖然經過了近一個半世紀的研究, 我們對玫瑰糠疹的確實致病原因仍未定案。我們述了一項有關玫瑰糠疹歷史的簡要研究。我們發現了玫瑰糠疹精確的首次描述時期不易肯定, 而典型及非典型的病例非常重疊; 前驅班及外周圍巾性脫屑等重要的臨牀徵狀, 都是在此病症描述了數十年後才被發 現的。初期的研究者除了用化驗數據外, 也用流行病學數據來作分析; 研究者多集中於醫生關注的事項, 而非患者關注的事項。這些發現對玫瑰糠疹未來的研究方向有着重要的啟發作用。enjournal article