Gizlenti · Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV 2014 · cross-sectional comparative study · n=116

The changes in the hair cycle during gestation and the post-partum period.

Cited 54 times in the scientific literature.

Level 4 - case-series / case-control

Cross-sectional comparative study evaluating separate groups of women at different gestational and post-partum stages

PubMed 23682615 · doi:10.1111/jdv.12188 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

A cross-sectional comparative study evaluated hair cycle dynamics in 116 women across four distinct groups: 28 at the 24th week of pregnancy, 30 at term pregnancy, 29 at four months post-partum, and 29 in their first post-partum year. Breastfeeding status and post-partum examination month were recorded. Anagen and telogen hair ratios were measured using TrichoScan.

What was found

Overall anagen and telogen ratios differed significantly across groups (P = 0.042; no absolute percentage values were reported in the abstract). At four months post-partum, the mean anagen rate was significantly lower and the telogen rate significantly higher compared with the 6th month (P = 0.045) and 9th month (P = 0.038) of pregnancy. Among women at four months post-partum, breastfeeding mothers had significantly higher anagen rates and lower telogen rates than non-breastfeeding mothers (P = 0.014). This difference between breastfeeding and non-breastfeeding groups was no longer statistically significant in the first post-partum year (P = 0.385).

Why it matters

This study provides phototrichographic evidence of the shift toward the telogen phase at four months post-partum and suggests that breastfeeding may temporarily preserve anagen hair follicles in the early post-partum period.

Limits

The study is cross-sectional comparing separate groups of women rather than a prospective longitudinal cohort tracking individuals across gestation and delivery. Exact numerical percentages for anagen and telogen rates, hormone levels, and clinical shedding severity were omitted from the abstract. Subgroup sample sizes were modest (28–30 per group).

Cited by