Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing alternative methods of measuring skin color and damage

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Cancer Causes & Control Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The current study investigated the reliability and validity of several skin color and damage measurement strategies and explored their applicability among participants of different races, skin types, and sexes.

Methods

One hundred college-aged participants completed an online survey about their perceived skin damage and skin protection. They also attended an in-person session in which an observer rated their skin color; additionally, UV photos and spectrophotometry readings were taken.

Results

Trained research assistants rated the damage depicted in the UV photos reliably. Moderate to high correlations emerged between skin color self-report and spectrophotometry readings. Observer rating correlated with spectrophotometry rating of current but not natural skin color. Lighter-skinned individuals reported more cumulative skin damage, which was supported by UV photography. Although women’s current skin color was lighter and their UV photos showed similar damage to men’s, women reported significantly more damaged skin than men did.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that self-report continues to be a valuable measurement strategy when skin reflectance measurement is not feasible or appropriate and that UV photos and observer ratings may be useful but need to be tested further. The results also suggest that young women and men may benefit from different types of skin cancer prevention interventions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

UV:

Ultraviolet

References

  1. ACS (2007) Cancer facts and figures 2004. American cancer society, Atlanta, GA

    Google Scholar 

  2. CDC (1996) National skin cancer prevention education program at a glance 1996. Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, GA

    Google Scholar 

  3. Glanz K, Mayer JA (2005) Reducing ultraviolet radiation exposure to prevent skin cancer methodology and measurement. Am J Prev Med 29:131–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Coups EJ, Manne SL, Heckman C (2008) Multiple skin cancer risk behaviors in the U.S. population. Am J Prev Med 34:87–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jackson A, Wilkinson C, Pill R (1999) Moles and melanomas—who’s at risk, who knows, and who cares? A strategy to inform those at high risk. Br J Gen Pract 49:199–203

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Sjöberg L, Holm LE, Ullen H, Brandberg Y (2004) Tanning and risk perception in adolescents. Health Risk Soc 6:81–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dennis LK, Kim Y, Lowe JB (2008) Consistency of reported tanning behaviors and sunburn history among sorority and fraternity students. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 24:191–198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Creech L, Mayer J (1997) Ultraviolet radiation exposure in children: a review of measurement strategies. Ann Behav Med 19:399–401

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fulton JE Jr (1997) Utilizing the ultraviolet (UV detect) camera to enhance the appearance of photodamage and other skin conditions. Dermatol Surg 23:163–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gibbons FX, Gerrard M, Lane DJ, Mahler HI, Kulik JA (2005) Using UV photography to reduce use of tanning booths: a test of cognitive mediation. Health Psychol 24:358–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mahler HI, Kulik JA, Gerrard M, Gibnons FX (2007) Long-term effects of appearance-based interventions on sun protection behaviors. Health Psychol 26(3):350–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mahler HI, Kulik JA, Gibbons FX, Gerrard M, Harrell J (2003) Effects of appearance-based interventions on sun protection intentions and self-reported behaviors. Health Psychol 22:199–209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mahler HI, Kulik JA, Harrell J, Correa A, Gibbons FX, Gerrard M (2005) Effects of UV photographs, photoaging information, and use of sunless tanning lotion on sun protection behaviors. Arch Dermatol 141:373–380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Pagoto S, McChargue D, Fuqua RW (2003) Effects of a multicomponent intervention on motivation and sun protection behaviors among midwestern beachgoers. Health Psychol 22:429–433

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Afromowitz MA, Van Liew GS, Heimbach DM (1987) Clinical evaluation of burn injuries using an optical reflectance technique. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 34:114–127. doi:10.1109/TBME.1987.326036

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bjerring P, Andersen PH (1987) Skin reflectance spectrophotometry. Photodermatol 4:167–171

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Andersen PH, Bjerring P (1990) Spectral reflectance of human skin in vivo. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 7:5–12

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Milne E, English DR, Johnston R, Cross D, Borland R, Giles-Corti B et al (2001) Reduced sun exposure and tanning in children after 2 years of a school-based intervention (Australia). Cancer Causes Control 12:387–393

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Godar D, Urbach F, Gasparro F, van der Leun J (2003) UV doses of young adults. Photochem hotobiol 77:453–457

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Knight JM, Kirinich AN, Farmer ER, Hood AF (2002) Awareness of the risks of tanning lamps does not influence behavior among college students. Arch Dermatol 138:1311–1315

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Fitzpatrick TB (1988) The validity and practicality of sun-reactive skin types I through VI. Arch Dermatol 124:869–871

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Konica_Minolta_Camera_Corporation (1998) Precise color communication. Osaka, Japan

    Google Scholar 

  23. Levine N, Sheftel SN, Eytan T, Dorr RT, Hadley ME, Weinrach JC et al (1991) Induction of skin tanning by subcutaneous administration of a potent synthetic melanotropin. J Am Med Assoc 266:2730–2760

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Muizzuddin N, Marenus K, Maes D et al (1990) Use of a chromameter in assessing the efficacy of anti-irritants and tanning accelerators. J Soc Cosmet Chem 41:369–378

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Seitz JC, Whitmore CG (1988) Measurement of erythema and tanning responses in human skin using a tri-stimulus colorimeter. Dermatologica 177:70–75

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Baron RM, Kenny DA (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol 51:1173–1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Bajdik CD, Gallagher RP, Hill GB, Fincham S (1998) Sunlight exposure, hat use, and squamous cell skin cancer on the head and neck. J Cutan Med Surg 3:68–73

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Böni R, Schuster C, Nehrhoff B, Burg G (2002) Epidemiology of skin cancer. Neuro Endocrinol Lett 23:48–51

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Davis KJ, Cokkinides VE, Weinstock MA, O’Connell MC, Wingo PA (2002) Summer sunburn and sun exposure among US youths ages 11 to 18: national prevalence and associated factors. Pediatrics 110:27–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hall HI, Saraiya M, Thompson T, Hartman A, Glanz K, Rimer B (2003) Correlates of sunburn experiences among U.S. adults: results of the 2000 National Health Interview Survey. Public Health Rep 118:540–549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Steffen AD, Glanz K, Wilkens LR (2007) Identifying latent classes of adults at risk for skin cancer based on constitutional risk and sun protection behavior. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 16:1422–1427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Thieden E, Philipsen PA, Sandby-Moller J, Wulf HC (2005) Sunscreen use related to UV exposure, age, sex, and occupation based on personal dosimeter readings and sun-exposure behavior diaries. Arch Dermatol 141:967–973

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Weinstock MA, Rossi JS, Redding CA, Maddock JE, Cottrill SD (2000) Sun protection behaviors and stages of change for the primary prevention of skin cancers among beachgoers in southeastern New England. Ann Behav Med 22:286–293

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Boldeman C, Jansson B, Dal H, Ullen H (2003) Sunbed use among Swedish adolescents in the 1990s: a decline with an unchanged relationship to health risk behaviors. Scand J Public Health 31:233–237. doi:10.1080/14034940310001208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Boldeman C, Jansson B, Nilsson B, Ullen H (1997) Sunbed use in Swedish urban adolescents related to behavioral characteristics. Prev Med 26:114–119. doi:10.1006/pmed.1996.9986

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Demko CA, Borawski EA, Debanne SM, Cooper KD, Stange KC (2003) Use of indoor tanning facilities by white adolescents in the United States. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 157:854–860

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. O’Riordan DL, Field AE, Geller AC, Brooks DR, Aweh G, Colditz GA et al (2006) Frequent tanning bed use, weight concerns, and other health risk behaviors in adolescent females (United States). Cancer Causes Control 17:679–686

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ries LAG, Melbert D, Krapcho M, Mariotto A, Miller BA, Feuer EJ et al (2006) SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2004. Based on November 2006 SEER data submission. (Institute NC ed): Bethesda, MD

  39. Feldman SR, Liguori A, Kucenic M, Rapp SR, Fleischer AB Jr, Lang W et al (2004) Ultraviolet exposure is a reinforcing stimulus in frequent indoor tanners. J Am Acad Dermatol 51:45–51

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Lamberg L (2002) “Epidemic” of malignant melanoma: true increase or better detection? JAMA 287:2201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. NCI (2007) SNP500Cancer Database. National Cancer Institute

  42. Robinson JK, Rigel DS, Amonette RA (1997) Trends in sun exposure knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors: 1986 to 1996. J Am Acad Dermatol 37:179–186

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding sources were K07CA108685-03 (Heckman) and CA006927 (Fox Chase Cancer Center Grant). The authors thank Sara Filseth, Makary Hofmann, Chelsea Rose, Cristina Haralambidis, Stuart Lessin, MD, and Clifford Perlis, MD, for their assistance with this research and manuscript preparation.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors state no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Lauren C. Daniel & Jacqueline D. Kloss

  2. Fox Chase Cancer Center, 510 Township Line Rd., First Floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19012, USA

    Carolyn J. Heckman & Sharon L. Manne

Authors
  1. Lauren C. Daniel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carolyn J. Heckman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jacqueline D. Kloss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sharon L. Manne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carolyn J. Heckman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Daniel, L.C., Heckman, C.J., Kloss, J.D. et al. Comparing alternative methods of measuring skin color and damage. Cancer Causes Control 20, 313–321 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-008-9245-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-008-9245-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation