ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
A Prospective Analysis of Skin and Fingertip Advanced Glycation End-Product Devices in Healthy Volunteers.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Reference Values of Skin Autofluorescence by Age Groups in Healthy Spanish Adults: Results from the EVasCu Study, a Systematic Review, and a Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) have been shown to accumulate in bone and are gaining interest in connective tissue research. Aims: To investigate the intrarater reliability, two-timepoint agreement and correlations within and between two commercially available skin autofluorescence (SAF) AGE devices. Methods: Healthy volunteers were enrolled in a prospective study at a single academic institution. Each participant underwent SAF analysis by two different, commercially available devices on two occasions, 14 days apart. Upon enrollment, a general survey about the participant’s lifestyle and health status was completed and followed up on for any changes at timepoint two. Results: In total, 40 participants (F:M ratio 5:3) with an average age of 39.0 ± 12.5 years were analyzed. For the AGE reader (skin) and AGE sensor (fingertip), both intrarater reliability and two-timepoint agreement were excellent with an interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) > 0.90 and a strong correlation within both machines. However, there was no correlation between both machines for either timepoint. In total, 4 participants were identified as outliers above the +2SD. Additionally, 5 participants with dark-colored skin could not be measured with the AGE reader at timepoint one and 4 at timepoint two. In contrast, all participants were able to undergo SAF analysis with the AGE sensor, irrespective of their skin type. Conclusions: Both machines showed excellent intrarater reliability and two-timepoint agreement, but the skin AGE reader might have limited applicability in individuals with dark-colored skin. Future research on AGEs might take our findings into consideration.
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.