Trial reportInternational wound journal2014
A laboratory comparison between two liquid skin barrier products.
Trial report in International wound journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Analyses of Cyanoacrylates for Barrier Protection and Incontinence-Related Wash-Off Resistance.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Spray Film-Forming systems as promising topicalSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2023Review
- Management of Moisture-Associated Skin Damage: A Scoping Review.Advances in skin & wound care · 2017Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exposure of skin to friction and moisture is detrimental to skin health. The purpose of this experimental study was to investigate the ability of a cyanoacrylate polymer film to protect human skin against moisture and abrasion. A secondary purpose of this study was to compare this cyanoacrylate material to a traditional barrier film. Twelve healthy subjects participated in the wash-off resistance test to determine the percentage of dye that was left on the skin after repeated washing. Ten subjects participated in the abrasion test. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) was measured before and after abrasion to determine the level of skin damage, as high water loss seen post-abrasion is indicative of skin damage post-abrasion. Skin treated with cyanoacrylate had significantly more dye remaining than sites treated with traditional film barrier or control sites. The change in TEWL was statistically lower for cyanoacrylate-treated areas.
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.