ArticleClinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology2022
Comparison Between Trichoscopic and Histopathological Evaluations of Hair Parameters.
Article in Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scalp Biopsies for Alopecia.Dermatopathology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Emerging non-invasive tools for hair follicle assessment: a narrative review on hyperspectral and terahertz imaging.Lasers in medical science · 2026Review
- Quantitative trichoscopic analysis of hair density in people attending tertiary care hospital - A cross-sectional study.Journal of cutaneous and aesthetic surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Collecting data on hair counts helps dermatologists diagnose hair diseases more accurately. Quantitative trichoscopy analysis and pathologic examination are two common ways to evaluate hair parameters. Purpose: The study aims to compare the effect of quantitative trichoscopy analysis and pathologic examination in hair counting and quantify the hair density of average Chinese people. Methods: Trichoscopy was performed in four scalp regions with a total of twenty-three volunteers without alopecia: frontal, vertex, occipital, and parietal. Hair density parameters were recorded. A 4-mm punch biopsy was performed in the occipital area, and all specimens were transversely sectioned serially and observed to calculate the hair densities. Results: The average hair density, hairs per follicle unit, and vellus hair ratio from quantitative trichoscopy analysis in the occipital region were 163.07±28.17/cm Conclusion: Quantitative trichoscopy is a noninvasive, quick, and convenient way to evaluate hair density. Histopathologic examination is an invasive way but provides more accurate data. The data obtained from trichoscopy and pathological examination are different to some extent, which cannot be substituted entirely for each other. This study established the reference for hair density in the adult Chinese population.
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.