Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31712293›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of family medicine2019

Blue-Light Therapy for Acne Vulgaris: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Anna Mae Scott, Paulina Stehlik, Justin Clark, Dexing Zhang, Zuyao Yang, Tammy Hoffmann, Chris Del Mar, Paul Glasziou

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of family medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Visible Light in the Treatment of Acne Vulgaris.Journal of cutaneous medicine and surgery
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. The virucidal potential effects of violet-blue light on influenza D virus.Photochemical & photobiological sciences : Official journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Photobiomodulation of the Visual System and Human Health.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  18. Review
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

8 authors.

Anna Mae ScottCentre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia ascott@bond.edu.au.
Paulina StehlikCentre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.
Justin ClarkCentre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.
Dexing ZhangDivision of Family Medicine and Primary Health Care, Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Zuyao YangDivision of Epidemiology, Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Tammy HoffmannCentre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.
Chris Del MarCentre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.
Paul GlasziouCentre for Research in Evidence-Based Practice, Bond University, Robina, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAntibiotic use in acne treatment raises concerns about increased resistance, necessitating alternatives. We assessed the effectiveness of blue-light therapy for acne.

methodsWe analyzed randomized controlled trials comparing blue light with nonlight interventions. Studies included people of any age, sex, and acne severity, in any setting, and reported on investigator-assessed change in acne severity, patients' assessment of improvement, change in inflammatory or noninflammatory lesions, and adverse events. Where data were sufficient, mean differences were calculated.

resultsEighteen references (14 trials) including 698 participants were included. Most of the trials were small and short (<12 weeks) and had high risk of bias. Investigator-assessed improvement was quantitatively reported in 5 trials, of which 3 reported significantly greater improvement in blue light than comparator, and 2 reported improvement. Patients' assessments of improvement were quantitatively reported by 2 trials, favoring blue light. Mean difference in the mean number of noninflammatory lesions was nonsignificant between groups at weeks 4, 8, and 10-12 and overall (mean difference [MD] = 3.47; 95% CI, -0.76 to 7.71;

conclusionMethodological and reporting limitations of existing evidence limit conclusions about the effectiveness of blue light for acne. Clinicians and patients should therefore consider the balance between its benefits and adverse events, as well as costs.

Indexed as

Acne VulgarisHumansPhototherapyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcomeacne vulgarishumanslightphototherapy

Identifiers

PMID31712293
PMCPMC6846280

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.