SynthesisBMJ clinical evidence2008
Acne vulgaris.
Synthesis in BMJ clinical evidence, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Topical, light-based, and complementary interventions for acne: an overview of systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Optimal Use Recommendations and Stewardship Principles with Oral Antibiotics in Acne Vulgaris Management: An Expert Consensus Panel.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Association Between Acne Vulgaris and Diet: An Exploratory Study on Patient Beliefs and Perceptions.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
- Polycystic ovary syndrome: definition, aetiology, diagnosis and treatment.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2018 · on this mapReview
- Quality of life in Iranian patients with acne.Dermatology research and practice · 2012Article
- Management strategies for acne vulgaris.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAcne vulgaris affects over 80% of teenagers, and persists beyond the age of 25 years in 3% of men and 12% of women. Typical lesions of acne include comedones, inflammatory papules, and pustules. Nodules and cysts occur in more severe acne and can cause scarring and psychological distress. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of topical and oral treatments in people with acne vulgaris? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to June 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
resultsWe found 67 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
conclusionsIn this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: topical treatments (adapalene, azelaic acid, benzoyl peroxide, clindamycin, erythromycin (alone or plus zinc), isotretinoin, tetracycline, tretinoin), and oral treatments (doxycycline, isotretinoin, lymecycline, minocycline, oxytetracycline, tetracycline).
Indexed as
Identifiers
19450306PMC2907987W4301889761What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.