ReviewCureus2026
Skin Bioelectrical Impedance as a Diagnostic Tool in Dermatology: A Literature Review of Current and Emerging Applications.
Review in Cureus, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Skin bioelectrical impedance and especially electrical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) have become a non-invasive, objective technique with the ability to characterize skin tissue at cellular and structural levels. The literature review uses a narrative synthesis to critically analyze the available evidence on four thematic areas, namely 1) the diagnosis of skin cancer and lesions, 2) the characterization of inflammatory skin diseases, 3) wound healing, and 4) the characterization of skin barrier integrity and hydration. Cross-domain comparison indicates that there are general biophysical effects across all applications, but with varying degrees of clinical validation. The main issues of concern are a critical lack of research standardization procedures, population heterogeneity of study groups, and the deployment of EIS in real-life clinical practices alongside artificial intelligence (AI)-related algorithms. The review ends with a set of research priorities that can be used to promote the translation of an adjunct diagnostic tool toward broader clinical validation across dermatological applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.