Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 166

The DOI matches its OpenAlex record.

Unreliability of Self-reported Burning Tendency and Tanning Ability

F.H.J. Rampen·1988·Archives of Dermatology

Abstract

Burning and tanning histories were studied in 790 white students 18 to 30 years of age by means of a self-administered questionnaire. Only 325 cases (41.1%) were classifiable according to the Fitzpatrick scheme (skin types I to IV). Skin type I (always burn, never tan) was recorded only twice (0.3%). The minimal erythemal dose was measured in a subgroup of 197 students; these results showed no significant correlation with the self-reported burning tendency. In 508 students the burning-tanning histories were compared with eye and hair color, freckling tendency, and number of moles. The tanning ability showed a better correlation with skin complexion characteristics than the burning tendency. It is concluded that self-reported burning-tanning histories form an unreliable means of skin typing.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

OpenAlex · 10.1001/archderm.124.6.885

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 166

Metadata

Authors
Rampen, F. H. J.
Venue
Archives of Dermatology
Publisher
American Medical Association
Published
1988-06-01
Volume
124
Issue
6
Pages
885-885
ISSN
0003-987X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2018459007
Cited by
166
References
0
FWCI
6.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Unreliability of Self-reported Burning Tendency and Tanning Ability. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archderm.124.6.885
The paper
Rampen, F. H. J. (1988). Unreliability of Self-reported Burning Tendency and Tanning Ability. Archives of Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.124.6.885

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.