Trial reportScientific reports2022
Investigation of actual exposure to facial sheet mask preceding its risk assessment.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Population-Based Cosmetics Exposure Parameters: Survey Approaches and Cosmetics Usage Results From Different Countries.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical Evaluation of a Multi-Component Facial Mask for Moisturizing, Repairing, and Anti-Aging Effects.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to reveal the amount per application of facial sheet masks and its influencing factors in Chinese population to form the base for an accurate exposure assessment. A total of 175 healthy subjects aged 18 years or older were recruited and divided into two subgroups: one group of 35 subjects were asked to apply same mask for 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 min respectively, and the other 140 subjects were instructed to apply one of four types of facial sheet masks presented in the market for 15 min. Furthermore, phenoxyethanol and methylparaben were measured to reflect actual exposure to chemicals. The sharp increase in the relative exposure to phenoxyethanol (CAS NO.122-99-6) and methylparaben at 25 min and longer suggests applying facial sheet masks for longer than 20 min may drive the exposure to hazardous chemicals to increase significantly. The 90th percentile of amount per application for plant-cellulose, bamboo charcoal fiber, bio-cellulose, and binchotan charcoal fiber-based masks was 5.753, 5.371, 5.017, and 4.821 g respectively. In addition, men and subjects with sebaceous skin demonstrated lower amount per application compared to women and subjects with dry skin, respectively. Finally, our data showed that the larger the contacting area between face and mask, the more amount per application. We concluded that the appropriate time of application should be less than 20 min. And mask fabrics, gender, sebum content, and contacting area could significantly impact the risk assessment of facial sheet masks. Our data for the first time provides insights into a realistic risk assessment of facial sheet masks in Chinese population.
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.