Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38545491›Full record

ArticleJAAD international2024

Quantitative measurement of hair diameter diversity as a diagnostic indicator of androgenetic alopecia in Korean males: A cross-sectional study.

Hee Ung Park, Kyung Bae Chung, Do-Young Kim

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAAD international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hee Ung ParkDepartment of Dermatology, Hanyang University Medical Center, Myongji Hospital, Goyang, Republic of Korea.
Kyung Bae ChungDepartment of Dermatology, Cutaneous Biology Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Do-Young KimDepartment of Dermatology, Cutaneous Biology Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Yonsei University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The conventional 20% threshold for hair diameter diversity (HDD), widely accepted for diagnosing androgenetic alopecia (AGA) in the vertex area, has not quantitatively analyzed. Objective: To validate the HDD 20% threshold for AGA and develop a refined, Korean-specific criterion. Methods: This study involved 240 male patients with AGA, categorized by the V stages of the basic and specific classification. Phototrichogram images of the vertex region were analyzed using Image J software for hair thickness measurement. Results: Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis determined the 45 μm hair diameter threshold as the most diagnostic for AGA, with an area under the curve value of 0.884 and a Youden index of 0.659. Optimal AGA diagnosis was achieved when over 21% of hair had a diameter of ≤45 μm. Limitations: Restriction to Korean male limits its applicability to a broader population, and using a specific hair diameter threshold does not account for individual variations in hair characteristics. Conclusion: The study validates the conventional HDD 20% threshold and proposes a more appropriate 45 μm threshold for Korean males, beyond the 40 μm. It concludes that while the HDD 20% remains a key method for early detection of vertex AGA, the definition of thin hair should be ethnicity-specific.

Indexed as

androgenetic alopeciadiagnostic criteriahair thicknessKoreanphototrichogramthreshold

Identifiers

PMID38545491
PMCPMC10966279
OpenAlexW4391849452

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.