ArticleLasers in medical science2024
Efficacy and safety of fractional micro-needling radiofrequency for the treatment of enlarged pores on the cheeks of a chinese cohort: a retrospective study.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short-term efficacy and safety of 5MHz fractional microneedle radiofrequency for facial rejuvenation: a prospective study.Annals of medicine · 2026Trial
- Combined Novel Microfocused Ultrasound and Microneedle Fractional Radiofrequency System for Multilayered Facial Rejuvenation: A Prospective, Randomized, and Split-Face Study.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2025Trial
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of 755-nm picosecond alexandrite laser with diffractive lens array vs. fractional microneedle radiofrequency for the treatment of facial photoaging: a retrospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To explore the efficacy and safety of fractional micro-needling radiofrequency (FMRF) in the treatment of enlarged pores on the cheek in a Chinese cohort. Patients with enlarged facial pores who underwent FMRF between January 2020 and December 2022 were included in this study. Blinded clinical assessments were performed by two independent dermatologists using a six-grade photographic enlarged pore scale and a quartile grading scale. Patients were asked to rate the degree of pain related to treatment on a visual analog scale (VAS), with scores ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain ever). A paired t-test was used to analyze the six-grade photographic enlarged pore scores. A total of 22 patients received three consecutive sessions of FMRF treatment, with intervals of 1-3 months, and underwent follow-up as scheduled. The mean six-grade photographic enlarged score was 3.55 ± 0.96 at baseline, while the score decreased significantly to 2.59 ± 0.59 after three treatment sessions (P < 0.05). The improvement score of the patients, assessed by two independent dermatologists, was 2.31 ± 0.71, according to the quartile grading scale. The mean VAS score was 6.42 ± 1.44. FMRF is effective and safe for the treatment of enlarged facial pores after three sessions.
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.