SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Interventions for female pattern hair loss.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for female pattern hair loss.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Interventions for rosacea.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Interventions for hirsutism (excluding laser and photoepilation therapy alone).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Topical antifungal treatments for tinea cruris and tinea corporis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia-Current Insights in Pathophysiology, Diagnostics, and Management.Endocrine reviews · 2022Review
- Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life Among Adult Women with Androgenetic Alopecia Using 5% Topical Minoxidil.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2021Article
- Effect of High-Dose Topical Minoxidil on Erythrocyte Quality in SKH1 Hairless Mice.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Article
- Female pattern hair loss: A clinical, pathophysiologic, and therapeutic review.International journal of women's dermatology · 2018Review
- Review
- Female pattern alopecia: current perspectives.International journal of women's health · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFemale pattern hair loss, or androgenic alopecia, is the most common type of hair loss affecting women. It is characterised by progressive shortening of the duration of the growth phase of the hair with successive hair cycles, and progressive follicular miniaturisation with conversion of terminal to vellus hair follicles (terminal hairs are thicker and longer, while vellus hairs are soft, fine, and short). The frontal hair line may or may not be preserved. Hair loss can have a serious psychological impact on people.
objectivesTo determine the effectiveness and safety of the available options for the treatment of female pattern hair loss in women. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the following databases up to October 2011: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library (2011, Issue 4), MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1974), PsycINFO (from 1806), AMED (from 1985), LILACS (from 1982), PubMed (from 1947), Web of Science (from 1945), and reference lists of articles. We also searched several online trials registries for ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that assessed the effectiveness of interventions for female pattern hair loss in women. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN
resultsTwenty two trials, comprising 2349 participants, were included. A wide range of interventions were evaluated, with 10 studies investigating the different concentrations of minoxidil. Pooled data from 4 studies indicated that a greater proportion of participants (121/488) treated with minoxidil reported a moderate increase in their hair regrowth when compared with placebo (64/476) (risk ratio (RR) = 1.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42 to 2.43). In 7 studies, there was an important increase of 13.28 in total hair count per cm(2) in the minoxidil group compared to the placebo group (95% CI 10.89 to 15.68). There was no difference in the number of adverse events in the twice daily minoxidil and placebo intervention groups, with the exception of a reported increase of adverse events (additional hair growth on areas other than the scalp) with minoxidil (5%) twice daily. Most of the other comparisons consisted of single studies. These were assessed as high risk of bias: They did not address our prespecified outcomes and provided limited evidence of either the efficacy or safety of these interventions. AUTHORS'
conclusionsAlthough more than half of the included studies were assessed as being at high risk of bias, and the rest at unclear, there was evidence to support the effectiveness and safety of topical minoxidil in the treatment of female pattern hair loss. Further direct comparison studies of minoxidil 5% applied once a day, which could improve adherence when compared to minoxidil 2% twice daily, are still required. Consideration should also be given to conducting additional well-designed, adequately-powered randomised controlled trials investigating several of the other treatment options.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.