The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Transepidermal water loss reflects permeability barrier status: validation in human and rodent in vivo and ex vivo models
Abstract
Abstract: Permeability barrier function is measured with instruments that assess transepidermal water loss (TEWL), either with closed‐ or open‐loop systems. Yet, the validity of TEWL as a measure of barrier status has been questioned recently. Hence, we tested the validity of this measure by comparing TEWL across a wide range of perturbations, with a variety of methods, and in a variety of models. TEWL rates with two closed‐chamber systems (VapoMeter and H4300) and one closed‐loop system (MEECO) under different experimental in vivo conditions were compared with data from four open‐loop instruments, i.e. TM 210, TM 300, DermaLab and EP 1. The instruments were compared in vivo both in humans and hairless mice skin subjected to different degrees of acute barrier disruption. The values obtained with bioengineering systems were correlated with absolute water loss rates, determined gravimetrically. Measurements with both closed and open systems correlated not only with each other, but each method detected different degrees of barrier dysfunction. Although all instruments differentiated among gradations in TEWL in the mid‐range of barrier disruption in vivo, differences in very low and very high levels of disruption were less accurately measured with the H4300 and DermaLab systems. Nevertheless, a high Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was calculated for data from all instruments vs. gravimetrically assessed TEWL. Together, these results verify the utility of TEWL as a measure of permeability barrier status. Moreover, all tested instruments are reliable tools for the assessment of variations in permeability barrier function.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Pinnagoda, J., Tupkek, R. A., Agner, T., & Serup, J. (1990) · Contact Dermatitis · doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1990.tb01553.x · Cited by 1,092
Ghadially, R., Brown, B. E., Sequeira-Martin, S. M., Feingold, K. R., & Elias, P. M. (1995) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci117919 · Cited by 563
Self-citationEEMCO Guidance for the Assessment of Transepidermal Water Loss in Cosmetic Sciences
Rogiers, V. (2001) · Skin Pharmacology and Physiology · doi:10.1159/000056341 · Cited by 525
Chamlin, S. (2002) · Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · doi:10.1016/s0190-9622(02)00048-8 · Cited by 449
Measurement of water exchange through skin
Nilsson, G. E. (1977) · Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing · doi:10.1007/bf02441040 · Cited by 448
Transepidermal water loss: the signal for recovery of barrier structure and function.
Grubauer, G., Elias, P. M., & Feingold, K. R. (1989) · Journal of Lipid Research · doi:10.1016/s0022-2275(20)38361-9 · Cited by 411
Self-citationKao, J. S., Fluhr, J. W., Man, M.-Q., Fowler, A. J., Hachem, J.-P., Crumrine, D., Ahn, S. K., Brown, B. E., Elias, P. M., & Feingold, K. R. (2003) · Journal of Investigative Dermatology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1747.2003.12053.x · Cited by 362
Self-citationLipid content and lipid type as determinants of the epidermal permeability barrier.
Grubauer, G., Feingold, K. R., Harris, R. M., & Elias, P. M. (1989) · Journal of Lipid Research · doi:10.1016/s0022-2275(20)38401-7 · Cited by 325
Self-citationContoversies in Experimental Dermatology
(2002) · Experimental Dermatology · doi:10.1034/j.1600-0625.2002.00112.x · Cited by 288
Holleran, W. M., Takagi, Y., Menon, G. K., Legler, G., Feingold, K. R., & Elias, P. M. (1993) · Journal of Clinical Investigation · doi:10.1172/jci116374 · Cited by 261
Self-citation
Cited by
Montero-Vilchez, T., Segura-Fernández-Nogueras, M.-V., Pérez-Rodríguez, I., Soler-Gongora, M., Martinez-Lopez, A., Fernández-González, A., Molina-Leyva, A., & Arias-Santiago, S. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm10020359 · Cited by 206
Boralevi, F., Hubiche, T., Léauté‐Labrèze, C., Saubusse, E., Fayon, M., Roul, S., Maurice‐Tison, S., & Taïeb, A. (2008) · Allergy · doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01556.x · Cited by 123
Cooke, A., Cork, M., Victor, S., Campbell, M., Danby, S., Chittock, J., & Lavender, T. (2016) · Acta Dermato Venereologica · doi:10.2340/00015555-2279 · Cited by 73
“TEWL, a validated measure of skin barrier function (35), was measured using a closed chamber TEWL instrument (Biox Aquaflux Model AF200).”
BackgroundMethodOno, E., Murota, H., Mori, Y., Yoshioka, Y., Nomura, Y., Munetsugu, T., Yokozeki, H., & Katayama, I. (2018) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0195960 · Cited by 46
Evaluation of a tape-stripping technique for measuring dermal exposure to pyrene and benzo(a)pyrene
Kammer, R., Tinnerberg, H., & Eriksson, K. (2011) · Journal of Environmental Monitoring · doi:10.1039/c1em10245a · Cited by 38
Metadata
- Authors
- Fluhr, J. W., Feingold, K. R., & Elias, P. M.
- Venue
- Experimental Dermatology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-06-02
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 483-492
- ISSN
- 0906-6705 (ISSN-L)
- 1600-0625
- OpenAlex
- W2082846747
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 60
- FWCI
- 8.56
- 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: Transepidermal water loss reflects permeability barrier status: validation in human and rodent in vivo and ex vivo models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-0625.2006.00437.x
- The paper
- Fluhr, J. W., Feingold, K. R., & Elias, P. M. (2006). Transepidermal water loss reflects permeability barrier status: validation in human and rodent in vivo and ex vivo models. Experimental Dermatology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0625.2006.00437.x
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.
