Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23903269›Full record

ReviewSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina2013

Evidence on acne therapy.

Caroline Sousa Costa, Edileia Bagatin

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Caroline Sousa CostaUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Brazil. carolinescosta2@terra.com.br
Edileia Bagatin
Federal Government of Brazil · BRUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among the current treatments available for acne vulgaris, many widely practiced options lack support from studies at the best level of scientific evidence. The aim of this narrative review was to present the very latest information on topical and systemic treatments for acne vulgaris. Information from systematic reviews and well-designed clinical trials, obtained through a systematic search of the major medical databases, is emphasized. There are important issues regarding the clinical management of acne that still lack consistent grounding in scientific evidence. Among these are the optimum dose and duration of treatment with oral antibiotics that can be given without inducing bacterial resistance, and the safety of oral isotretinoin.

Indexed as

Acne VulgarisAnti-Bacterial AgentsBenzoyl PeroxideContraceptives, Oral, CombinedDermatologic AgentsEvidence-Based MedicineHumansIsotretinoinRetinoidsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBenzoyl PeroxideContraceptives, Oral, CombinedDermatologic AgentsIsotretinoinRetinoids

Identifiers

PMID23903269
PMCPMC10852114
OpenAlexW1496400211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.