Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41090615›Full record

ReviewJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025

The Whys and Hows of Aesthetic Medicine: Anamnesis, Skin Assessment and Instrumental Evaluation by A Specific, Update Protocol (Mediskin Check-Up).

E Bartoletti, M Secchi, E Fulgione, N Fraone, M Veraldi, D Feleppa, L Cavalieri

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review 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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

E BartolettiAmbulatory Service of Aesthetic Medicine for Psychophysical Well-Being in Pathology Isola Tiberina Hospital-Gemelli Isola, Rome, Italy.
M SecchiInternational School Carlo Alberto Bartoletti Foundation, Università Cattolica del Sacro, Rome, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-1587-2052
E FulgioneDermatology Clinic, Luigi Vanvitelli University of Campania, Naples, Italy.
N FraoneInternational School Carlo Alberto Bartoletti Foundation, Rome, Italy.
M VeraldiPrivate Practice, Rome, Italy.
D FeleppaPrivate Practice, Rome, Italy.
L CavalieriDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera San Camillo-Forlanini, Rome, Italy.

Funding

Pierre Fabre Italy Srl
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSkin evaluation in Aesthetic Medicine requires standardized methods to ensure reproducibility. The Mediskin check-up protocol, first introduced in the late 1970s, provided a systematic approach to skin assessment in non-pathological contexts. Advances in medicine and cosmetology have since required an update of this methodology.

aimsTo present the updated Mediskin check-up protocol and demonstrate its value for accurate diagnosis and personalized treatment planning in Aesthetic Medicine. PATIENTS/

methodsThe revised protocol integrates updated anamnesis, clinical examination, and instrumental evaluation under standardized conditions to ensure reproducibility.

resultsThe protocol allows for the identification of skin biotypes (normal, seborrheic, dry, or sensitive), defined by combined anamnesis, clinical findings, and instrumental parameters. It establishes a reproducible diagnostic framework that supports follow-up assessments and individualized treatment regimens.

conclusionsThe updated Mediskin protocol provides a standardized and reproducible method for skin evaluation in Aesthetic Medicine. By integrating clinical and instrumental data, it enhances diagnostic accuracy, guides personalized therapy, and supports safe and effective patient care.

Indexed as

Clinical ProtocolsPhysical ExaminationSkinDermatologyEstheticsHumansReproducibility of Resultsaesthetic medicinecosmetic scheduleinstrumental skin evaluationMediskin check‐upskin biotypestandardization

Identifiers

PMID41090615
PMCPMC12522527

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.