Pipeline of Devices and Aesthetics: What Is Left?

Albert Zhou, Timothy Klufas, Erik Choi, Todd Schlesinger

Abstract readEditorial

In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Albert ZhouDr. Zhou is with the Department of Dermatology at the University of Connecticut, Farmington, Connecticut.

Timothy KlufasMr. Klufas is with the School of Medicine at New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York.

Erik ChoiMr. Choi is with the School of Medicine at University of Connecticut, Farmington, Connecticut.

Todd SchlesingerDr. Schlesinger is with Clinical Research Center of the Carolinas, Charleston, South Carolina and the Department of Dermatology at the George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aesthetic dermatology is experiencing a continued shift toward minimally invasive procedures with the least amount of patient downtime. Herein we focus on the advancements and evolving technologies in the development for neurotoxins, fillers, exosomes, microneedling, and microcoring devices that are currently available or in development. These treatment advancements offer dermatologists a broader range of tools, enabling more patients to pursue cosmetic treatments with greater comfort and individualized care.

Indexed as

Aesthetic dermatologybotulinum toxinexosomesmicrocoringmicroneedlingminimally invasive proceduresneurotoxinssoft tissue fillers

Identifiers

PMID42239847

PMCPMC13229157

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.