ArticleDermatology and therapy2026
Egyptian National Consensus on Dermocosmetic Ingredient Selection Across Common Dermatology Scenarios: A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Study.
Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2026. 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDermocosmetics are widely used to complement dermatologic care, yet context-specific guidance remains limited for populations with Fitzpatrick skin types III-V. We convened a national expert panel to generate transparent, reproducible recommendations across ten common clinical scenarios.
methodsEgyptian dermatologists participated in round 1 (national survey, n = 601) and round 2 (expert panel, n = 16), both with anonymous ratings and inter-round feedback, using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method (median bands 1-3/4-6/7-9; disagreement index (DI) = interpercentile range (IPR)/IPR adjusted for symmetry (IPRAS); DI > 1.0 = disagreement). Per-item outputs included median, P30, P70, IPR (30-70), asymmetry Index (AI), IPRAS, DI, and final category (appropriate/uncertain/inappropriate). We additionally benchmarked classifications against prior consensus, guidelines, and key evidence frameworks.
resultsAcross ten vignettes and 30 ingredients (30 ingredients × 10 scenarios = 300 items; multiple raters per item in round 1), 158 (52.7%) items were appropriate (median ≥ 7; DI ≤ 1.0), 135 (45.0%) were uncertain, and 7 (2.3%) were inappropriate. Photoprotection had the highest appropriateness across scenarios (broad-spectrum/tinted SPF), with a small number of DI-flagged uncertain exceptions. Hydration/barrier agents (e.g., hyaluronic acid, peptides, ceramides) were appropriate in stress-aging, post-laser, and post-procedure care. Pigment modulators (tranexamic acid, arbutin, niacinamide, vitamin C, glabridin) were appropriate in melasma/post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation and chronic sun-induced pigmentation. Classical retinoids were inappropriate for postpartum/breastfeeding and immediate post-procedure; lower-irritancy retinoid esters were context-dependent. Botanicals showed inconsistent support. Panel disagreement (DI > 1.0) declined from 38.3% in round 1 to 15.7% (47/300) in round 2. Patterns largely aligned with prior consensus; visible-light-mitigating photoprotection and timing-specific retinoid use were emphasized for darker phototypes.
conclusionWe provide a transparent, regionally relevant framework for dermocosmetic ingredient selection. Sun protection and barrier support are foundational; pigment modulators are scenario-specific; retinoids require selective use; botanicals remain adjunctive.
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.