Rampen F H, Fleuren B A, de Boo T M, Lemmens W A
Department of Dermatology, University of Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Arch Dermatol. 1988 Jun;124(6):885-8.
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.
通过一份自填式问卷,对790名年龄在18至30岁的白人学生的晒伤和晒黑史进行了研究。根据菲茨帕特里克分类法(皮肤类型I至IV),只有325例(41.1%)可分类。皮肤类型I(总是晒伤,从不晒黑)仅记录到两例(0.3%)。在197名学生的亚组中测量了最小红斑剂量;这些结果显示与自我报告的晒伤倾向无显著相关性。在508名学生中,将晒伤-晒黑史与眼睛和头发颜色、雀斑倾向及痣的数量进行了比较。晒黑能力与肤色特征的相关性比晒伤倾向更好。结论是,自我报告的晒伤-晒黑史是一种不可靠的皮肤分型方法。