ReviewSkin health and disease2025
Comparison of the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma with topical minoxidil in treating patients with androgenetic alopecia: a systematic review of clinical trials.
Review in Skin health and disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and Safety of Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Topical Minoxidil in Androgenetic Alopecia: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Baseline Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Stratifies Early Trichoscopic Response to Platelet-Rich Plasma-Based Regimens in Non-Scarring Alopecia: A Real-World Cohort with Internal Validation Using an Interpretable Neural Network.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is a very common cause of noncicatricial alopecia, which negatively affects a person's wellbeing. Although Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs such as topical minoxidil result in an apparent improvement in this hair condition in a period of 4-6 months and have been used commonly as the first-line treatment of choice, another treatment modality that has gained popularity over the years is platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy. PRP is minimally invasive but much more cost-effective than restoration surgery. The FDA has not approved PRP as a treatment modality for AGA. We systematically reviewed the existing literature from Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL and PubMed from inception to 2024, and included six clinical trials that compared these two commonly practised dermatological therapies for the treatment of AGA. Most studies used global photographic assessment of hair changes based on the investigator's examination, which demonstrated statistically significant changes in hair density, terminal hair count and hair pull test. A few studies used subjective quantitative measures of hair parameters, such as patient satisfaction scores and improvement in hair quality. Topical minoxidil showed more improvement in terminal hair count and proportion of anagen hair. PRP showed more improvement in hair density and a negative hair pull test. All of the selected studies suggested that the efficacy of PRP is nearly comparable to that of topical minoxidil, with minimal adverse effects on long-term follow-up. Thus, PRP is a valuable treatment option either adjuvant to topical minoxidil or as a second-line treatment option for AGA.
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.