Trial reportJournal of cosmetic dermatology2025
Effectiveness and Tolerability of an Emollient "Plus" Compared to Urea 10% in Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Atopic Dermatitis.
Trial report in Journal of cosmetic dermatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gut-Brain-Skin Axis: From Mechanistic Insights to Translational Applications in Neurocosmetics.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Review
- Postbiotics in Dermatology: A Literature Review of Emerging Topical Therapies for Acne, Rosacea, and Eczema.Cureus · 2026Review
- Influence of Oral Collagen Peptides on Skin Biophysical Properties in Humans: A Narrative Review.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Review
- Skin Microbiome, Nanotoxicology, and Regulatory Gaps: Chronic Cosmetic Exposure and Skin Barrier Dysfunction-A Systematic Review.Pharmaceutics · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAtopic dermatitis (AD) poses a challenge due to its chronic inflammatory nature. Recent research highlights microbiome dysbiosis as a key contributor. Emollients "plus" are modern moisturizers containing bacterial lysate, improving skin barrier function and reducing Staphylococcus aureus colonization, thus mitigating AD symptoms. Emollient "plus" containing Vitreoscilla filiformis biomass (Aqua Posae filiformis) is efficient in AD, as single adjunct for milder forms or adjunctive to systemic treatments in more severe forms. Standard recommended moisturizers for AD in Indonesia contain urea 10%.
aimsThis trial compared an emollient "plus" (Group A) with urea 10% moisturizer (Group B) in the treatment of mild-to-moderate AD. PATIENTS/
methodsSixty subjects with mild-to-moderate AD were randomized into Groups A and B (30 subjects/group). Test products were applied twice daily for 12 weeks. Clinical and instrumental endpoints assessed at Weeks 0, 4, 8, and 12 included Severity Scoring of AD (SCORAD), Pruritus Visual Analog Scale (PVAS), Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), Transepidermal Water Loss (TEWL), skin hydration, skin pH, as well as tolerance evaluation.
resultsSignificant differences in favor of the emollient "plus" versus urea 10% were observed on TEWL and skin pH values at Weeks 4, 8, and 12, on SCORAD and skin hydration values at Weeks 8 and 12. EASI, DLQI, and PVAS values differed significantly at Week 12 in favor of Group A. Both products were well tolerated.
conclusionsThis emollient "plus" has superior efficacy in improving AD symptoms and skin barrier function compared to urea 10% moisturizer.
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.