ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2024
Development and Validation of a Composite Skin Quality Scale.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2024. 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.
- Challenging Interchangeability: Dynamic Dose-Response Modelling of Botulinum Toxin A Products.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2026Article
- Transforming Skin Quality Evaluation With AI: From Subjective Grading to Data-Driven Precision.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The increasing demand for skin quality interventions in aesthetic medicine underscores the necessity for objective, evidence-based assessment tools that may be used to evaluate novel interventions or devices. Objectives: To develop and validate a 5-point photonumeric rating scale for assessing overall skin quality, including radiance, color evenness, and smoothness. Methods: The IBSA (Institut Biochimique SA) Composite Skin Quality Scale was developed and underwent live validation with 88 real-world patients, chosen to encompass a broad spectrum of skin qualities and Fitzpatrick skin types. Scale validation was performed by board-certified plastic surgeons and dermatologists over 2 rounds, 2 weeks apart. Reliability was assessed through intrarater and interrater agreements, utilizing weighted kappa statistics and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The scale's ability to discern a clinically relevant 1-grade difference was evaluated with 72 photo pairs. Results: Combined intrarater reliability results showed weighted kappa values of 0.812 (right side) and 0.815 (left side) and an ICC of 0.903 for both sides, indicating an almost perfect agreement. Interrater reliability ranged from substantial to almost perfect, with kappa coefficients between 0.654 and 0.853 and ICCs between 0.657 and 0.855 across all rater pairs in both rounds. The ability to detect a clinically relevant 1-point difference using the scale was established. Conclusions: Integrating various key aspects of skin quality, the IBSA Composite Skin Quality Scale is a clinically relevant and highly reliable tool, suitable for skin assessment in clinical studies of new aesthetic technologies and products. Level of Evidence 3:
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.