Delphi consensus on melasma management by international experts and pigmentary disorders society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Melasma, an acquired hyperpigmentation disorder, affects individuals of all ethnicities. Its multifactorial aetiology, high recurrence rates and psychosocial impact complicate management and necessitate comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to develop an international consensus on the diagnosis and management of melasma by synthesizing expert opinions and the latest scientific evidence. METHODS: This consensus was developed using a modified Delphi approach. A core group of two senior dermatologists who were experts in pigmentary disorders guided the process, and a diverse panel of 38 dermatologists with a special interest in pigmentary disorders from 11 countries (Australia, Brazil, France, India, Italy, Mexico, Philippines, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan and the USA) participated in three rounds of surveys and discussions, under the aegis of the Pigmentary Disorders Society (PDS). A literature search of articles published between 2014 and 2024 identified key studies that were graded using the Oxford levels of evidence (2009). Consensus statements were drafted, refined and finalized based on expert feedback. Responses were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale, with predefined thresholds for high (≥75%), moderate (55%-74%) and low (<55%) agreement. RESULTS: The consensus development process started with 34 statements, and at the end of the third round of the Delphi process, 21, 4 and 1 statement reached high, moderate and low consensus, respectively. Key recommendations highlighted photoprotection with broad-spectrum sunscreens as essential, regulated and supervised use of hydroquinone-based triple combination creams as the gold standard, and alternatives such as topical azelaic acid, kojic acid and oral tranexamic acid. Adjunctive procedural therapies, such as chemical peels and microneedling, were suggested to enhance topical efficacy, while lasers were reserved for refractory cases. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations aim to improve the outcomes of melasma patients globally by integrating expert opinion and evidence-based strategies. Future research should focus on evaluating emerging therapies and optimizing long-term maintenance strategies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".