ArticleArchives of dermatological research2024
Detection of demodex mites in papulopustular rosacea using microscopic examination and polymerase chain reaction: a comparative case-control study.
Article in Archives of dermatological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Demodicosis Mite Detection in Eyes with Blepharitis and Meibomian Gland Dysfunction Based on Deep Learning Model.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparison of two techniques for measuringParasitology · 2025Article
- Serum Zonulin and Its Role in Rosacea Pathogenesis: A Comprehensive Estimation Study.Dermatology practical & conceptual · 2025Article
- Significance ofMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Review
- Therapy-associated facial redness in atopic dermatitis: insights from a case series.Anais brasileiros de dermatologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Demodex mite proliferation is frequently involved in the pathogenesis of rosacea. The gold standard for Demodex identification is microscopic examination on a standardized skin surface biopsy. However, this method of sampling can be distressing and painful, especially when performed on hairy sites. In this case-control study, we compared the sensitivity of PCR and microscopic examination in diagnosing a Demodex infestation. Moreover, we investigated the possible correlations between the presence of Demodex mites and clinical characteristics. In total, 20 patients affected by papulopustular rosacea and 10 controls were included. At both microscopic examination and PCR, patients with rosacea presented a greater prevalence of positive samples than controls at the scalp and at the face. Microscopy had sensitivity of 50% at the face and of 46.7% at the scalp. PCR had sensitivity of 93.75% at the face and of 86.7% at the scalp. The positivity of PCR was associated to a higher frequency of facial papules and pustules. Patients with positivity at the face had a more frequent positivity at the scalp. The scalp could represent a reservoir for the Demodex mites, and should be investigated by sensitive and painless methods. PCR performed on painlessly collected samples should be further investigated.
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.