ArticleEinstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2018
Comparative study of transepidermal water loss in patients with and without hyperhidrosis by closed-chamber measurer in an air-conditioned environment.
Article in Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- How to diagnose and measure primary hyperhidrosis: a systematic review of the literature.Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society · 2021Pooled it
- Selective TScientific reports · 2021Trial
- The use of an objective method (continuous exosomatic electrodermal activity without external stimuli) to evaluate patients with hyperhidrosis undergoing video-assisted sympathectomy.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- Moisturising Gloves as a Solution for Occupational Skin Health: Advances and Challenges.Contact dermatitis · 2025Review
- Continuous evaluation of exosomatic electrodermal activity in patients with primary palmoplantar hyperhidrosis.Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the difference in transepidermal water loss in patients diagnosed with hyperhidrosis and healthy subjects, in an air-conditioned environment.
methodsTwenty patients diagnosed with hyperhidrosis and 20 healthy subjects were subjected to quantitative assessment using a closed-chamber device, in six previously established sites.
resultsThe measurements showed different transepidermal water loss values for healthy subjects and patients with hyperhidrosis, especially in the hands and feet. In the Control Group, the median for the hands was 46.4g/m2/hour (p25: 36.0; p75: 57.6), while in the Hyperhidrosis Group, the median was 123.5g/m2/hour (p25: 54.3; p75: 161.2) - p<0.001. For the feet, the Control Group had a median of 41.5g/m2/hour (p25: 31.3; p75: 63.5) and the Hyperhidrosis Group, 61.2g/m2/hour (p25: 32.3; p75: 117) - p<0.02. Measurements of the axillas also showed differences. In the Control Group, the median was 14.8g/m2/hour (p25: 11.8; p75: 19.0) and, in the Hyperhidrosis Group, 83.5g/m2/hour (p25: 29.5; p75: 161.7) - p<0.001.
conclusionMeasuring transepidermal water loss is sufficient for diagnosis and follow-up of patients with hyperhidrosis.
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.