ArticleDermatology practical & conceptual2026
Unmasking Facial Melanosis: A Prospective Clinico-Dermoscopic Study.
Article in Dermatology practical & conceptual, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVarious entities of acquired facial melanosis present with considerable clinical overlap, posing diagnostic challenges. Dermoscopy is being increasingly used in its diagnosis.
objectivesTo assess dermoscopic and clinicopathological features of facial melanosis in Fitzpatrick skin types IV-VI.
methodsA prospective cross-sectional study of clinical and dermoscopic features of facial melanosis-lichen planus pigmentosus (LPP), pigmented contact dermatitis (PCD), and facial acanthosis nigricans (FAN)-was conducted. Melasma, periorbital hyperpigmentation, and nevus of Ota were excluded.
resultsFifty-six patients were included: 31 (55.4%) with LPP, 18 (32.1%) FAN, and seven (12.5%) PCD. Clinically, LPP showed significantly more involvement of face (55.2 ± 22.2%) (P=0.029), especially the chin (29, 93.5%) (P=0.006). Dermoscopy revealed more than one pattern of pigment structures in 54 (96.4%) patients. Predominant patterns in LPP were reticular (21, 67.7%), peppered (15, 48.4%), and annular (13, 41.9%). There was an overlap of patterns like annular, annular-granular, and reticular in both LPP and PCD. Peppered (15, 48.4%) was significantly more in LPP (P=0.023), while linear dots were seen exclusively in LPP (4, 12.9%); smudged was significantly more in PCD (6, 85.7%) and FAN (15, 83.3%) (P=0.003). Concentric circles (16, 88.9%) and parallel lines (14, 77.8%) were significantly more in FAN (P<0.001 each), while crypts-gyri (10, 55.6%) and papillary projections (8, 44.4%) were seen exclusively in FAN. Combination of dots and clods was also significantly more in LPP (26, 83.9%; P=0.007), whereas blue-gray pigmentation (19, 61.3%) was observed exclusively in LPP.
conclusionDistinct dermoscopic features aid in differentiating acquired facial melanosis. Blue-gray dots and clods in peppered, reticular, and linear dots patterns favor LPP, while concentric circles, parallel lines, crypts-gyri, and papillary projections suggest FAN. Recognition of these patterns may obviate biopsy in cosmetically sensitive areas.
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.