At DermatologySense, accuracy and transparency are central to how we create dermatology information.
Because skin, hair, and nail health are medical subjects, we do not rely on search results, social media posts, personal opinions, or unsupported claims as the primary basis for our health information.
Our content is researched using reputable medical, scientific, academic, and professional sources. When appropriate, we cite the evidence used to support important medical claims so readers can understand where the information comes from and explore the underlying sources themselves.
Our Evidence-Based Approach
DermatologySense is committed to publishing evidence-informed, medically responsible, and transparent health information.
Depending on the topic, our research may include:
- Peer-reviewed medical and scientific research
- Systematic reviews and meta-analyses
- Clinical practice guidelines
- Medical consensus statements
- Professional dermatology organizations
- Government health agencies
- Academic and medical institutions
- Drug and treatment information from authoritative sources
- Clinical trials and other primary research
- Established medical reference resources
We consider the quality, relevance, currency, and limitations of available evidence rather than treating every online source as equally reliable.
Our Source Hierarchy
The appropriate source depends on the question being answered. However, we generally prioritize evidence in the following way.
1. Clinical Practice Guidelines
When available and relevant, current clinical practice guidelines can provide an important foundation for information about diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, and management.
For dermatology topics, this may include guidelines published by recognized professional organizations such as the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) and other established medical societies.
The AAD, for example, publishes evidence-based guidelines covering conditions including acne, atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, melanoma, basal cell carcinoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, and other dermatologic topics.
2. Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses can help evaluate findings across multiple studies and provide a broader view of the available evidence.
When appropriate, we consider these sources when discussing treatment effectiveness, risks, outcomes, or other questions where multiple studies are available.
3. Peer-Reviewed Research
We may use peer-reviewed studies published in established medical and scientific journals to support specific claims.
Primary research can be particularly important when discussing newer treatments, emerging technologies, mechanisms of disease, or questions that have not yet been addressed by comprehensive clinical guidelines.
Individual studies are interpreted within their limitations and are not automatically treated as definitive evidence.
4. Government and Public Health Sources
For information involving medications, safety, disease surveillance, public health, regulatory decisions, or other official matters, we may reference authoritative government and public health agencies.
These sources can provide important information about approved uses, safety communications, warnings, public health recommendations, and regulatory status.
5. Professional Medical Organizations
Recognized medical and dermatology organizations can provide clinical guidelines, consensus statements, professional recommendations, educational resources, and other authoritative information.
We consider the organization’s expertise, methodology, publication date, and relevance to the subject when using these resources.
6. Academic and Medical Institutions
Universities, teaching hospitals, research institutions, and other established medical organizations may also provide useful educational and scientific information.
These sources may be particularly helpful for explaining diseases, anatomy, procedures, research findings, and complex medical concepts in understandable language.
How We Evaluate Sources
A source is not considered reliable simply because it appears high in a search engine.
When evaluating information, we consider several factors.
Authority
Who produced the information?
We consider the qualifications and expertise of the author, researchers, clinicians, institution, journal, or organization responsible for the source.
Evidence
What evidence supports the claim?
We consider the type and quality of evidence available and whether the source actually supports the statement being made.
Relevance
Does the evidence apply to the specific question?
Evidence from one population, condition, treatment, or clinical situation may not automatically apply to another.
Currency
How recent is the information?
Medical knowledge changes. We therefore pay particular attention to publication dates, updated guidelines, new research, regulatory changes, and emerging safety information.
Methodology
How was the information produced?
Where relevant, we consider study design, sample size, methodology, potential bias, limitations, conflicts of interest, and whether the findings have been independently supported.
Transparency
Can readers identify and review the original source?
Whenever practical, we provide citations that allow readers to investigate the evidence themselves.
How We Connect Citations to Medical Claims
Our goal is not to add citations simply to make an article look authoritative.
Citations should have a meaningful relationship with the information being presented.
We may cite sources to support:
- Definitions of medical conditions
- Symptoms and clinical features
- Causes and risk factors
- Prevalence and epidemiological information
- Treatment recommendations
- Medication information
- Treatment effectiveness
- Potential risks and side effects
- Diagnostic approaches
- Prevention recommendations
- Clinical guidelines
- Scientific mechanisms
- Safety information
- Statements about emerging or experimental treatments
When a source provides limited evidence, we aim to communicate those limitations rather than presenting the information as established medical fact.
When Medical Evidence Is Conflicting
Medical research does not always produce one universal answer.
Different studies may produce different results, clinical guidelines may evolve, and evidence may be insufficient for some questions.
When meaningful disagreement or uncertainty exists, DermatologySense aims to reflect the current evidence accurately rather than presenting speculation as fact.
We may explain:
- What the available evidence shows
- Where evidence is limited
- Where studies disagree
- Whether recommendations vary between organizations
- Whether additional research is needed
The existence of uncertainty does not mean that all claims have equal scientific support.
Clinical Guidelines Can Change
Clinical guidelines are not permanent documents.
Professional organizations periodically review and update their recommendations as new evidence becomes available.
For example, the American Academy of Dermatology describes its guideline development process as involving review and grading of scientific literature, expert physician work groups, peer review, and approval. The Academy also periodically reviews guidelines and updates them when appropriate.
For this reason, DermatologySense considers the publication and update date of important sources when researching medical topics.
Primary Sources and Original Research
Whenever practical, we prefer to trace important medical claims back to the original or most authoritative source.
For example, when discussing a clinical recommendation, we may refer to the relevant clinical guideline rather than relying solely on a secondary article describing that guideline.
Similarly, when discussing a scientific finding, we may reference the original research publication or a high-quality systematic review when appropriate.
This approach helps reduce the risk of information being repeatedly copied or misinterpreted as it moves from one website to another.
Sources We Generally Do Not Treat as Primary Medical Evidence
Search engines, social media posts, online forums, anonymous content, influencer recommendations, commercial advertisements, and user-generated content can contain useful experiences or leads for further research.
However, they are not automatically considered authoritative medical evidence.
We do not treat popularity, search ranking, number of shares, or online engagement as evidence that a medical claim is true.
Commercial websites may also contain useful information, but we consider potential commercial interests when evaluating their claims.
Commercial and Industry Sources
Some medical information originates from pharmaceutical companies, medical device manufacturers, skincare brands, laboratories, or other commercial organizations.
These sources can provide important information about products, clinical studies, regulatory submissions, or safety data.
However, commercial interests can affect how information is presented.
When using industry or manufacturer information, we consider the source’s purpose, the nature of the claim, available independent evidence, and whether the information can be corroborated by other authoritative sources.
Commercial information is not automatically accepted as independent medical evidence.
Source Dates and Content Updates
Medical content can become outdated even when the original information was accurate when published.
DermatologySense therefore considers updates when important evidence, guidelines, treatments, safety information, or medical recommendations change.
Where applicable, our pages may display:
Published: The date the content was originally published.
Last updated: The date the content was substantially reviewed or updated.
An update may involve reviewing medical claims, checking cited sources, incorporating new evidence, correcting inaccuracies, or improving the clarity of existing information.
A changed date should represent a genuine publication or substantive update rather than a cosmetic change made solely to make a page appear newer.
Human Expertise and Medical Review
Sources are an important part of trustworthy medical content, but citations alone do not establish medical authority.
Where appropriate, DermatologySense seeks qualified medical or subject-matter expertise for content that requires clinical interpretation.
When medical review is performed, we aim to clearly identify the reviewer and provide relevant professional credentials and profile information.
Readers should be able to distinguish between:
- The person who researched or wrote the content
- The medical professional who reviewed the content
- The organization responsible for publishing the information
We do not present a medical professional as an author, reviewer, or expert unless that person has actually participated in the content process.
Corrections and Source Updates
Accuracy is an ongoing responsibility.
If we identify an inaccurate statement, outdated recommendation, broken citation, misleading interpretation, or other substantive problem, we aim to review and correct the affected content.
We also welcome feedback from readers, healthcare professionals, researchers, and other knowledgeable individuals who identify potential problems with our sources or medical information.
If you believe an article contains an error or needs a stronger source, please contact us.
Our Commitment to Medical Transparency
DermatologySense aims to make it clear:
- What we are saying.
- Why we are saying it.
- What evidence supports it.
- Where that evidence comes from.
- How current that evidence is.
- What limitations or uncertainty exist.
This approach is intended to help readers make better-informed decisions about their skin health while maintaining appropriate boundaries around medical information.
We believe trustworthy health content should not ask readers to simply trust a website. It should make the underlying evidence, sources, authorship, and limitations as transparent as reasonably possible.
Important Medical Disclaimer
DermatologySense provides educational information about dermatology, skin, hair, and nail health. Our content is intended to help readers understand medical topics and prepare for informed conversations with healthcare professionals.
Information on this website is not a diagnosis and should not be used as a substitute for an examination, diagnosis, or individualized treatment plan from a qualified healthcare professional.
Medical conditions can look different from person to person, and treatment decisions may depend on factors that cannot be evaluated through online information alone.
If you have a persistent, painful, rapidly changing, bleeding, infected, or otherwise concerning skin condition or lesion, seek evaluation from an appropriate healthcare professional.
This content is for informational purposes only and not a substitute for professional medical advice. Always consult a qualified dermatologist for concerns about your skin.