Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34783007›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of dermatology2022

Ultraviolet radiation exposure to the face in patients with xeroderma pigmentosum and healthy controls: applying a novel methodology to define photoprotection behaviour.

R P E Sarkany, M Canfield, M Morgan, L Foster, K Johnstone, K Sainsbury, V Araujo-Soares, H C Wulf, J Weinman, J Walburn and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of dermatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

R P E SarkanyXeroderma Pigmentosum Unit, Guys and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1067-3973
M CanfieldHealth Psychology Section, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
M MorganSchool of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5532-8941
L FosterXeroderma Pigmentosum Unit, Guys and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
K JohnstoneSchool of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
K SainsburyPopulation Health Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
V Araujo-SoaresPopulation Health Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
H C WulfDepartment of Dermatology, Bispebjerg University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
J WeinmanSchool of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
J WalburnSchool of Cancer and Pharmaceutical Sciences, King's College London, London, UK.
S NortonHealth Psychology Section, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
King's College London · GBGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBNewcastle University · GBBispebjerg Hospital · DK

Funding

Programme Grants for Applied Research RP-PG-1212-20009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn xeroderma pigmentosum (XP), the main means of preventing skin and eye cancers is extreme protection against ultraviolet radiation (UVR). Protection is most important for the face.

objectivesWe aimed to assess how well patients with XP adhere to medical advice to protect against UVR by objectively estimating the mean daily dose of UVR to the face.

methodsWe objectively estimated the UVR dose to the face in 36 patients with XP and 25 healthy individuals over 3 weeks in the summer. We used a new methodology which combined UVR dose measurements from a wrist-worn dosimeter with an activity diary record of face photoprotection behaviour for each 15-min period spent outside. A protection factor was associated with each behaviour, and the data were analysed using a negative binomial mixed-effects model.

resultsThe mean daily UVR dose (weighted for DNA damage capacity) to the face in the patients with XP was 0·13 standard erythemal doses (SEDs) (mean in healthy individuals = 0·51 SED). There was wide variation between patients (range < 0·01-0·48 SED/day). Self-caring adult patients had a very similar UVR dose to the face as cared-for patients (0·13 vs. 0·12 SED/day), despite photoprotecting much more poorly when outside, because the self-caring adults were outside in daylight much less.

conclusionsPhotoprotection behaviour varies widely within the XP group indicating that nonadherence to photoprotection advice is a significant issue. The timing and duration of going outside are as important as photoprotective measures taken when outside, to determine the UVR exposure to the face. This new methodology will be of value in identifying the sources of UVR exposure in other conditions in which facial UVR exposure is a key outcome, particularly in patients with multiple nonmelanoma skin cancers.

Indexed as

Skin NeoplasmsXeroderma PigmentosumAdultFaceHealth BehaviorHumansUltraviolet Rays

Identifiers

PMID34783007
PMCPMC9306996
OpenAlexW3214726978

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.