ArticleArchives of dermatological research2020
Sunscreen application technique amongst patients with a history of skin cancer.
Article in Archives of dermatological research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sun-protective behaviours in US adults with a history of skin cancer: a cross-sectional National Health Interview Survey study.Skin health and disease · 2026Article
- A novel online survey approach designed to measure consumer sunscreen application thickness-implications for estimating environmental emissions.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2024Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundData on how patients with a history of skin cancer apply sunscreen are lacking.
objectiveTo characterize (1) gender differences in sunscreen application technique (quantity used, anatomic site coverage, and time allocated) and (2) differences in sunscreen application to unaffected skin versus previous skin cancer sites.
methodsSubjects with a history of skin cancer were asked to apply sunscreen to their head as they normally would. The amount of sunscreen used and application time were recorded. Before and after photos were taken. Using Wood's lamp lighting, an anatomic site coverage score was rated on an ordinal scale (1 = 0-25%, 2 = 26-50%, 3 = 51-75%, 4 = 76-100% coverage).
resultsMales used 530 mg more sunscreen (p < 0.001) and applied approximately 5 mg/cm LIMITATIONS: Observations in a controlled setting may not reflect usual sunscreen application practices.
conclusionsOverall, skin cancer survivors of both genders effectively applied sunscreen in line with recommended quantity guidelines, but men were significantly better at protecting their ears.
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.