ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Prescribing Trends for Acne Vulgaris Visits in the United States.
Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Single-cell transcriptomics and spatial validation reveal dysfunction of keratinocytes and NK cells driving acne development.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Scientific Rationale and Clinical Basis for Clindamycin Use in the Treatment of Dermatologic Disease.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Managing common dermatologic needs in transgender and gender-diverse adolescents.Current pediatrics reports · 2024Article
- Photopneumatic Technology for the Treatment of Mild-to-moderate Acne Vulgaris-Expert Perspectives.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2023Article
- Photopneumatic Technology for the Treatment of Mild-to-moderate Acne Vulgaris-A Review and Expert Perspectives.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acne vulgaris is the most common reason for pediatric patients and third most common reason for adult patients to seek care from a dermatologist in the US. However, referring providers may be reluctant to initiate patients on acne treatment or certain prescriptions. We assessed over-the-counter (OTC) and prescription acne (antibiotic and non-antibiotic) treatment rates to characterize differences by patient demographics and provider specialty. The National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) was analyzed for all acne therapies prescribed for at least 10 unweighted visits between 1993 and 2016 (most recent years available). Prescription rates varied by age, with younger patients more likely to receive a prescription; insurance status, with privately insured patients more likely to receive a prescription; and across and within specialties, with dermatologists more likely to recommend a prescription medication than family medicine and pediatric providers. Among all forms of antibiotics for acne vulgaris, oral minocycline was the most commonly prescribed antibiotic by dermatologists, followed by oral doxycycline. Oral minocycline was also the most common antibiotic prescribed by family physicians, followed by oral doxycycline and oral clindamycin, respectively. Pediatricians appeared to be less likely to prescribe oral antibiotics for acne. The OTC topical antimicrobial benzoyl peroxide was the most utilized drug for acne among pediatricians, and it was also the most commonly recommended OTC drug for acne among dermatologists, family physicians, and pediatricians.
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.