ArticleCureus2025
Evaluation of Golf Apparel for Ultraviolet Protection: An Analysis of Skin Coverage Provided by Leading U.S. Golf Apparel Brands for a High-Risk Population.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background This study aimed to assess the extent of protective design elements and fabric characteristics of apparel items specifically marketed to golfers from leading online U.S. brands for providing adequate ultraviolet (UV) protection across demographic groups, with particular attention to anatomical areas at highest risk of UV exposure. Methodology Five leading golf apparel brands were identified using a composite metric. Brand webpages designated for golf-specific apparel were assessed for design features and textile claims across categories (tops, bottoms, accessories, hats) for men, women, and children. A seven-point composite score quantified skin coverage provided by tops. Chi-square tests determined differences in offerings across demographics. Results Across 671 golf apparel items, adequate protection of vulnerable body sites was low overall. Ultraviolet protection factor (UPF) labeling was low for clothing options, ranging from 7.1% to 16.7%. Coverage offered by garment design, including the arms, hands, and neck, was limited overall, while chest and back coverage were nearly universal. The mean composite scores for coverage features of tops on a seven-point scale were 3.69 for both men and women and 3.48 for children. Significant differences in top features across demographic groups were observed using a chi-square analyses for back coverage (χ²(2) = 16.59, p < 0.001), shoulder coverage (χ²(2) = 12.40, p = 0.002), whole arm coverage (χ²(2) = 19.85, p < 0.001), and hand coverage (χ²(2) = 7.76, p = 0.021), suggesting design variations among age and gender that may impact sun-protective elements. Conclusions Performance apparel specifically marketed toward golfers often lacks key design features and textiles for adequate protection of vulnerable skin. Manufacturers likely emphasize style and wearability over evidence-based UV protective principles; collaboration with dermatologists and public health experts can improve these gaps in garment design and marketing. Clinicians should additionally recognize these shortcomings and counsel golfers on their increased risks, as available clothing options may not ensure adequate UV protection. Recommendation for UPF-certified garments and targeted sun-protective accessories, such as sleeves, can offer more reliable and versatile UV protection for this vulnerable population.
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.