ArticleArchives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique2016
Characterization of heavy users of skin care products among Norwegian women from 2003 to 2011.
Article in Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Socioeconomic status in the association between use of personal care products and exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals in pregnant Taiwanese women.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Exploring diet as a source of plasticizers in pregnancy and implications for maternal second-trimester metabolic health.Environmental research · 2024Article
- Serum analysis in women and in vitro skin assay for the assessment of exposure to parabens in antiperspirants.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Article
- Use of skincare products and risk of cancer of the breast and endometrium: a prospective cohort study.Environmental health : a global access science source · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral ingredients in personal care products (PCPs) have been classified as endocrine disruptors (EDs) and concern has been raised whether use of PCPs can affect human health. We aimed to characterize Norwegian female users of skin care products and compare life style characteristics between heavy users and non-users.
methodsThis cross-sectional study consisted of 114 202 women (age 41-76 years) participating in the Norwegian Women and Cancer study, a large population-based prospective cohort study. Based on self-reported questionnaire data, we classified the study subjects into five groups according to a calculated percentage of skin area creamed per day. Life-style characteristics were then compared between heavy users (using body lotion twice a day) and non-users. Change in use from 2003 to 2011 was assessed through repeated measurements (
resultsHeavy users of skin care products had a significantly lower BMI, higher level of physical activity, higher income, higher alcohol consumption, fewer children and a shorter total time of breastfeeding than non-users (
conclusionsHeavy users of skin care products differ significantly from non-users on BMI, degree of daily physical activity, income, number of children, use of hormonal pharmaceuticals, smoking and alcohol consumption. Use of skin care products is common among women aged 41-76 years in Norway, and the use is consistent over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.