ArticleJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025
Standardization of Clinical Photos for Tracking Management of Hair Loss in Dermatology Clinics.
Article in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2025. 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.
- Standardized Clinical Photography for Improving Dermatological Treatment Adherence (Scoping Review): Evidence Landscape and Research Gaps.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Review
- Standardization of Clinical Photos for Tracking Management of Hair Loss in Dermatology Clinics.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
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
backgroundDespite its usefulness, clinical photos are not frequently utilized for hair loss patients seen in dermatology due to inefficiency and lack of standardization. Standardized photography for hair loss patients has been shown to improve patient motivation, satisfaction, and treatment monitoring.
aimsThis study introduced standardized photography protocols through educational materials for staff with the aim of improving clinical documentation for hair loss patients.
methodsOver an initial 10-month period, 32% (16/50) of randomly selected patients presenting with a chief complaint of hair loss to an academic dermatology practice had optimal standardized photos. Though numerous underlying factors likely accounted for this shortcoming, one contributing cause was that nurses and medical assistants (MAs) in the department were not trained to obtain necessary photos for each visit. We aimed to increase correct standardized photos in a dermatology clinic to 60% of hair loss patients. We created a 2-min video demonstrating three main points: when to take hair loss photos during appointments, which views to take, and how to upload pictures into patient charts. This video was distributed to all nurses and MAs in the department.
resultsAfter the distribution of the training video, nurses and MAs were statistically significantly more likely to take the correct hair loss photos, with 66% (33/50) of patients having correct pictures taken with a minimum of three views (p < 0.005).
conclusionsStandardized photography for hair loss patients is a simple intervention with positive benefits. By improving clinical documentation, care, and outcomes for patients seeking treatment for hair loss can be improved.
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.