ArticleSkin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI)2025
Menopause, Menstrual Cycle, and Skin Barrier Function.
Article in Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are a limited number of studies describing the impact of the menstrual cycle and postmenopause on the skin barrier function, and existing research data are conflicting. The aim of our research was to investigate the impact of the menstrual cycle and postmenopause on the epidermal barrier function and its main biophysical parameters-transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and skin hydration (SH). MATERIALS AND
methodsEighty-one female participants were included in the study, aged 18-65 years, of which 36 in the reproductive period (average age 27.06 ± 5.60 years) and 45 in postmenopause (average age 56.56 ± 4.37 years). TEWL and SH were measured during the ovulatory and mid-luteal phases in participants in the reproductive period, and on two occasions, 7 days apart, in posmenopausal participants.
resultsThe mean TEWL value was significantly higher in the mid-luteal phase (TEWL 2; 9.92 ± 1.37) compared to the ovulatory phase (TEWL 1; 8.87 ± 1.59). However, no significant difference in TEWL was observed between the two groups of participants. The mean SH value was significantly higher in the ovulatory phase (SH 1; 40.55 ± 7.80) compared to the mid-luteal phase (SH 2; 36.27 ± 7.42). Moreover, SH in the ovulatory phase was significantly higher in comparison to the postmenopausal group (40.55:36.27; p = 0.009).
conclusionOur study indicates a more functional epidermal barrier during the ovulatory phase, as evidenced by higher TEWL values and lower SH values compared to the mid-luteal phase. However, the differences between the two participant groups remain intriguing, as no significant difference in TEWL was observed between them, despite significantly higher SH values in the ovulatory phase compared to the postmenopausal group.
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.