Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37776370›Full record

SynthesisLasers in medical science2023

A systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy, safety, and satisfaction rates of laser combination treatments vs laser monotherapy in skin rejuvenation resurfacing.

Arash Pour Mohammad, Milad Gholizadeh Mesgarha, Farnoosh Seirafianpour, Yeganeh Karimi, Sogand Sodagar, Maryam Afraie, Azadeh Goodarzi

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Arash Pour MohammadFaculty of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, Iran.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3064-4299
Milad Gholizadeh MesgarhaFaculty of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, Iran.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5101-6112
Farnoosh SeirafianpourStudent Research Committee, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, Iran.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3794-6206
Yeganeh KarimiStudent Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Sogand SodagarIran University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Tehran, Iran.
Maryam AfraieDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran.
Azadeh GoodarziDepartment of Dermatology, Rasool Akram Medical Complex Clinical Research Development Center (RCRDC), School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Niyayesh St, Sattarkhan Avenue, Tehran, 1445613131, Iran. azadeh_goodarzi1984@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1249-4429
Iran University of Medical Sciences · IRKurdistan University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Laser therapies have been well-established in ameliorating skin-aging consequences. This systematic review aims to determine the efficacy, safety profile, and satisfaction rates of laser combination therapies on skin rejuvenation resurfacing. A systematic search was performed in four major databases up to September 2022. Skin rejuvenation studies were eligible comprising at least one laser combination arm, inclusive of all laser types (ablative or non-ablatives), and one monotherapy arm selected from one of the combined modalities. Studies combining one laser modality with radiofrequency (RF) or intense pulse light (IPL) were also assessed. Trials that did not encompass a monotherapy control arm were evaluated independently as single-arm studies. Eighteen clinical trials recruiting 448 cases were included after screening. A total of 532 nm KTP + 1064 nm Nd:YAG and 2940 nm Er:YAG + Nd:YAG were the two most utilized laser combinations and exerted higher improvements and milder adverse events, compared to their monotherapy in most studies. Combining CO

Indexed as

Lasers, GasLasers, Solid-StateLaser TherapySkin AgingCarbon DioxideErythemaHumansPainRejuvenationTreatment OutcomeCarbon DioxideCombinationEfficacyKTPLaserNd:YAGRejuvenationSafetySkin agingSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37776370
OpenAlexW4387210873

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.