Skin: what evidence wins at the Board

For skin appeals, how often the Board granted the issue when the record held each kind of evidence, and how often when it did not. Measured from the decisions themselves; every number carries its fraction.

What this is computed from: evidence types detected in the full text of 1,907,778 public Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions (va.gov/vetapp), joined to the issue-level outcome. The tables use only single-issue decisions with a clean parse in complete crawl years (1993–2025) — 852,152 decisions — so each evidence flag attaches to exactly one decided issue. A split is shown only when both sides have at least 30 decisions. Data build: 2026-09-02.

Service connection for Skin (n = 6,511)

When the record had…Granted, with itGranted, without itDifferenceRemanded, with it
A medical source gave a positive nexus opinionEvidence in the record48% (301/633)28% (1,073/3,818)+19 pts13% (98/732)
Private physician opinion, letter or DBQEvidence in the record38% (301/800)29% (1,073/3,651)+8 pts14% (127/937)
Disability Benefits Questionnaire in the recordEvidence in the record42% (62/149)30% (1,312/4,302)+11 pts40% (98/247)
Third-party lay statements (spouse, buddy, employer)Evidence in the record36% (126/346)30% (1,248/4,105)+6 pts11% (42/391)
Service treatment records document the condition or injuryEvidence in the record31% (639/2,075)31% (735/2,376)-0 pts14% (342/2,443)
Service treatment records silent for the conditionEvidence in the record17% (340/1,961)42% (1,034/2,490)-24 pts7% (159/2,154)
Continuity of symptoms argued (38 CFR 3.303(b))Theory argued24% (397/1,687)35% (977/2,764)-12 pts6% (103/1,797)
Board hearing held or testimony takenProcedure34% (786/2,288)27% (588/2,163)+7 pts25% (781/3,156)
Social Security records in the fileEvidence in the record23% (33/145)31% (1,341/4,306)-8 pts7% (11/162)
Medical literature or treatise citedEvidence in the record26% (226/864)32% (1,148/3,587)-6 pts28% (343/1,209)
Functional loss / DeLuca factors argued (rating cases)Theory argued34% (106/308)31% (1,268/4,143)+4 pts17% (64/375)
Presumptive service connection discussedTheory argued21% (608/2,855)48% (766/1,596)-27 pts14% (476/3,363)
Secondary service connection (38 CFR 3.310) in playTheory argued23% (343/1,471)35% (1,031/2,980)-11 pts18% (328/1,844)
Combat service / 1154(b) in playTheory argued33% (201/615)31% (1,173/3,836)+2 pts13% (91/716)
A medical source gave a negative nexus opinionEvidence in the record31% (615/2,003)31% (759/2,448)-0 pts29% (820/2,830)
No nexus opinion of recordEvidence in the record7% (36/510)34% (1,338/3,941)-27 pts6% (32/553)
VA examination or VA medical opinion obtainedEvidence in the record31% (1,110/3,627)32% (264/824)-1 pts29% (1,505/5,190)
Board found a VA exam or opinion inadequateHow the Board read the record38% (340/889)29% (1,034/3,562)+9 pts49% (865/1,764)
Board found the VA exam or opinion adequateHow the Board read the record12% (38/329)32% (1,336/4,122)-21 pts2% (8/338)
Board found the veteran's statements credibleHow the Board read the record66% (292/442)27% (1,082/4,009)+39 pts8% (40/483)
Board found the veteran's statements not credible or inconsistentHow the Board read the record4% (7/182)32% (1,367/4,269)-28 pts3% (6/189)
Benefit of the doubt resolved in the veteran's favorHow the Board read the record86% (586/681)21% (788/3,770)+65 pts1% (8/689)
Preponderance of the evidence against / doctrine not applicableHow the Board read the record1% (26/1,969)54% (1,348/2,482)-53 pts0% (1/1,971)
Duty-to-assist error foundHow the Board read the record36% (15/42)31% (1,359/4,409)+5 pts87% (327/374)
Board ordered a new exam or addendum opinionProcedure32% (225/693)31% (1,149/3,758)+2 pts68% (1,493/2,210)
AMA favorable finding acknowledgedProcedure65% (105/161)30% (1,269/4,290)+36 pts44% (127/288)

"Granted" = share of issues decided on the merits (granted + denied); remands and dismissals are excluded from that fraction and shown separately. Fractions are the raw counts.

Increased rating for Skin (n = 2,621)

When the record had…Granted, with itGranted, without itDifferenceRemanded, with it
A medical source gave a positive nexus opinionEvidence in the record21% (7/33)18% (354/1,920)+3 pts15% (6/40)
Private physician opinion, letter or DBQEvidence in the record28% (48/169)18% (313/1,784)+11 pts9% (17/188)
Disability Benefits Questionnaire in the recordEvidence in the record35% (29/84)18% (332/1,869)+17 pts37% (50/134)
Third-party lay statements (spouse, buddy, employer)Evidence in the record26% (11/43)18% (350/1,910)+7 pts7% (3/46)
Service treatment records document the condition or injuryEvidence in the record18% (69/381)19% (292/1,572)-0 pts3% (14/405)
Service treatment records silent for the conditionEvidence in the record20% (11/55)18% (350/1,898)+2 pts5% (3/63)
Board hearing held or testimony takenProcedure21% (166/788)17% (195/1,165)+4 pts17% (177/1,027)
Social Security records in the fileEvidence in the record13% (8/60)19% (353/1,893)-5 pts10% (7/71)
Medical literature or treatise citedEvidence in the record19% (6/32)18% (355/1,921)+0 pts20% (8/41)
Functional loss / DeLuca factors argued (rating cases)Theory argued23% (114/499)17% (247/1,454)+6 pts17% (104/610)
Presumptive service connection discussedTheory argued25% (8/32)18% (353/1,921)+7 pts9% (3/35)
Secondary service connection (38 CFR 3.310) in playTheory argued17% (76/449)19% (285/1,504)-2 pts8% (42/505)
Combat service / 1154(b) in playTheory argued26% (17/65)18% (344/1,888)+8 pts7% (6/84)
A medical source gave a negative nexus opinionEvidence in the record12% (17/145)19% (344/1,808)-7 pts7% (11/167)
VA examination or VA medical opinion obtainedEvidence in the record19% (340/1,828)17% (21/125)+2 pts18% (399/2,262)
Board found a VA exam or opinion inadequateHow the Board read the record20% (44/218)18% (317/1,735)+2 pts36% (131/360)
Board found the VA exam or opinion adequateHow the Board read the record20% (44/225)18% (317/1,728)+1 pts2% (4/230)
Board found the veteran's statements credibleHow the Board read the record43% (46/107)17% (315/1,846)+26 pts3% (3/110)
Benefit of the doubt resolved in the veteran's favorHow the Board read the record72% (99/137)14% (262/1,816)+58 pts1% (2/140)
Preponderance of the evidence against / doctrine not applicableHow the Board read the record8% (86/1,120)33% (275/833)-25 pts0% (0/1,122)
Board ordered a new exam or addendum opinionProcedure21% (49/236)18% (312/1,717)+3 pts59% (375/634)

"Granted" = share of issues decided on the merits (granted + denied); remands and dismissals are excluded from that fraction and shown separately. Fractions are the raw counts.

All Skin issues, every benefit type (n = 10,852)

When the record had…Granted, with itGranted, without itDifferenceRemanded, with it
A medical source gave a positive nexus opinionEvidence in the record47% (325/691)29% (2,058/7,023)+18 pts14% (111/804)
Private physician opinion, letter or DBQEvidence in the record38% (416/1,108)30% (1,967/6,606)+8 pts12% (160/1,282)
Disability Benefits Questionnaire in the recordEvidence in the record44% (133/302)30% (2,250/7,412)+14 pts35% (164/466)
Third-party lay statements (spouse, buddy, employer)Evidence in the record37% (153/416)31% (2,230/7,298)+6 pts10% (49/468)
Service treatment records document the condition or injuryEvidence in the record30% (806/2,680)31% (1,577/5,034)-1 pts12% (373/3,092)
Service treatment records silent for the conditionEvidence in the record18% (364/2,068)36% (2,019/5,646)-18 pts7% (168/2,276)
Continuity of symptoms argued (38 CFR 3.303(b))Theory argued24% (409/1,734)33% (1,974/5,980)-9 pts6% (107/1,852)
Board hearing held or testimony takenProcedure34% (1,235/3,620)28% (1,148/4,094)+6 pts22% (1,065/4,868)
Social Security records in the fileEvidence in the record23% (53/235)31% (2,330/7,479)-9 pts9% (24/270)
Medical literature or treatise citedEvidence in the record27% (255/948)31% (2,128/6,766)-5 pts28% (365/1,316)
Functional loss / DeLuca factors argued (rating cases)Theory argued33% (333/1,019)31% (2,050/6,695)+2 pts18% (220/1,253)
Presumptive service connection discussedTheory argued22% (634/2,946)37% (1,749/4,768)-15 pts14% (492/3,471)
Secondary service connection (38 CFR 3.310) in playTheory argued24% (525/2,153)33% (1,858/5,561)-9 pts15% (403/2,621)
Combat service / 1154(b) in playTheory argued34% (254/743)31% (2,129/6,971)+4 pts12% (103/874)
A medical source gave a negative nexus opinionEvidence in the record30% (675/2,253)31% (1,708/5,461)-1 pts28% (863/3,134)
No nexus opinion of recordEvidence in the record7% (39/537)33% (2,344/7,177)-25 pts7% (39/587)
VA examination or VA medical opinion obtainedEvidence in the record31% (1,999/6,535)33% (384/1,179)-2 pts24% (2,121/8,767)
Board found a VA exam or opinion inadequateHow the Board read the record36% (448/1,232)30% (1,935/6,482)+7 pts46% (1,083/2,338)
Board found the VA exam or opinion adequateHow the Board read the record18% (116/630)32% (2,267/7,084)-14 pts2% (14/646)
Board found the veteran's statements credibleHow the Board read the record64% (397/625)28% (1,986/7,089)+36 pts6% (43/669)
Board found the veteran's statements not credible or inconsistentHow the Board read the record6% (13/208)32% (2,370/7,506)-25 pts3% (7/216)
Benefit of the doubt resolved in the veteran's favorHow the Board read the record85% (871/1,024)23% (1,512/6,690)+62 pts1% (12/1,037)
Preponderance of the evidence against / doctrine not applicableHow the Board read the record5% (192/3,539)52% (2,191/4,175)-47 pts0% (2/3,544)
Duty-to-assist error foundHow the Board read the record29% (27/93)31% (2,356/7,621)-2 pts80% (419/521)
Board ordered a new exam or addendum opinionProcedure32% (338/1,072)31% (2,045/6,642)+1 pts65% (2,062/3,189)
AMA favorable finding acknowledgedProcedure62% (116/187)30% (2,267/7,527)+32 pts42% (134/321)

"Granted" = share of issues decided on the merits (granted + denied); remands and dismissals are excluded from that fraction and shown separately. Fractions are the raw counts.

Reading these tables honestly

Association, not cause. A positive nexus opinion appears in the records of granted appeals far more often than in denied ones. That does not mean any letter wins; it means the Board grants when the evidence supports the claim, and a nexus opinion is how that support usually reaches the file.

Appeals are not claims. Every decision here is an appealed denial. Grant rates at the Board say nothing about the share of initial claims VA grants.

Findings are outcomes in disguise. Rows under "how the Board read the record" — credibility, benefit of the doubt, an inadequate exam — describe how the judge decided, not evidence to gather. They are shown because they say which arguments the Board actually reaches for.

Detection is by text pattern. Each evidence type is found by reading the decision for finding-shaped language with negation handling; precision was read on samples before publication and is stated per feature in the method notes below. Expect a few percent of misclassified rows, not zero.

Which of these is missing from your file?

VetAid's free analyzer reads your decision letter and records, then ranks the evidence gaps by exactly these numbers — for your conditions, not the average.

Analyze my claim free →

See also: Skin decisions · all conditions · outcome rates.