Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceSystematic ReviewEurope PMCOpen access

Skin measurement devices to assess skin quality: A systematic review on reliability and validity

Langeveld M., van de Lande LS., O' Sullivan E., van der Lei B., van Dongen JA.

Systematic Review with a reported sample of 3172 on Skin Aging, published in Skin Res Technol (2022) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Systematic Review
Journal
Skin Res Technol (2022)
Reported sample size
3172
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
34751474
PMCID
PMC9299221
DOI
10.1111/srt.13113
Citations
28

Abstract (original English)

Background Many treatments aim to slow down or reverse the visible signs of skin aging and thereby improve skin quality. Measurement devices are frequently employed to measure the effects of these treatments to improve skin quality, for example, skin elasticity, color, and texture. However, it remains unknown which of these devices is most reliable and valid. Materials and methods MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were searched. Instruments were scored on reporting construct validity by means of convergent validity, interobserver, intraobserver, and interinstrument reliability. Results For the evaluation of skin color, 11 studies were included describing 16 measurement devices, analyzing 3172 subjects. The most reliable device for skin color assessment is the Minolta Chromameter CR-300 due to good interobserver, intraobserver, and interinstrument reliability. For skin elasticity, seven studies assessed nine types of devices analyzing 290 subjects in total. No intra and interobserver reliability was reported. Skin texture was assessed in two studies evaluating 72 subjects using three different types of measurement devices. The PRIMOS device reported excellent intra and interobserver reliability. None of the included reviewed devices could be determined to be valid based on construct validity. Conclusion The most reliable devices to e

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
HumansSkin PigmentationReproducibility of ResultsSkin Aging

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research