Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41195697›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of dermatology2026

International Expert Consensus on Defining Skin of Color and Delivering Equitable Dermatologic Care.

Henry W Lim, Chengfeng Zhang, Marisa Taylor, Ncoza C Dlova, Katleen Conceição, Nina Jablonski, Neha Gupta, Janet Wangari-Olivero, Andrew Alexis

Abstract readConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of dermatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Diagnosing skin conditions in patients with skin of colour: Is colour the only challenge?Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

9 authors.

Henry W LimDepartment of Dermatology, Henry Ford Health, Detroit, Michigan, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1576-1115
Chengfeng ZhangDepartment of Dermatology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1302-5667
Marisa TaylorDepartment of Dermatology, Epsom & St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust, Sutton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6385-8918
Ncoza C DlovaNelson R. Mandela School of Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2425-3905
Katleen ConceiçãoDermatology in Black Skin, Federal Hospital, Bonsucesso, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-2164-430X
Nina JablonskiDepartment of Anthropology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7644-874X
Neha GuptaDepartment of Dermatology, Madhya Pradesh Medical Science University, Jabalpur, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-7283-735X
Janet Wangari-OliveroL'Oreal, Research and Innovation, Clark, New Jersey, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-4753-5115
Andrew AlexisDepartment of Dermatology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York City, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1351-9165

Funding

L'Oréal Dermatological Beauty
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dermatological practice faces significant challenges in meeting the needs of populations with skin of color (SOC). Patients with SOC face disparities, including misdiagnoses and inequitable treatment outcomes. This expert consensus sought to identify gaps in dermatologic care for these populations and to propose strategies to promote inclusivity. Classification systems for SOC and healthcare disparities were investigated by reviewing English language articles on the subject published in PubMed between 2019 and 2024. An international panel of multidisciplinary experts from four continents (America, Asia, Africa, and Europe) analyzed the findings and developed recommendations. There are limitations in the current skin type classification systems, and gaps persist for SOC populations in research, clinical trials, and education for both providers and patients. Proposed strategies to bridge these gaps include refining classification systems (Dermatology societies), advancing SOC-specific research, enhancing education, and integrating artificial intelligence. Key recommendations from the panel focused on four areas: (1) Research: Achieve SOC numbers in clinical trials and publications that would be a reflection of local and global populations, publish new guidelines on key SOC-related issues, and achieve representative authorship in the said clinical trials and publications; (2) Resources: Create a global library of SOC images for dermatological diseases; (3) Education: Provide training for healthcare professionals and scholarships for students worldwide to improve awareness and expertise; (4) Representation: Ensure SOC representation in images used for patient communication and educational materials.

Indexed as

DermatologyHealthcare DisparitiesHealth EquitySkin DiseasesSkin PigmentationEthnic and Racial MinoritiesHumansclassificationhealthcare disparitiesmedical educationpatient education as topicskin of colorskin pigmentationSOCterminology

Identifiers

PMID41195697
PMCPMC12712775

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.