Trial reportLasers in medical science2026
Fractional microneedle radiofrequency for photoaging and atrophic acne scar: a split-face clinical observation of two devices.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fractional microneedle radiofrequency (FMR) has been proven effective and safe for acne scar and skin rejuvenation, but the treatment outcomes vary across different FMR devices. The face of each participant was randomly assigned as treatment side (treated with the Peninsula Timerevert Needle) and control side (treated with the EndyMed) along the midline. Outcome measures include melanin index (MI), erythema index (EI), stratum corneum hydration (SCH), sebum and dermal density on all facial sites. The treatment duration, participant's satisfaction score and physician's global assessment (PGA) score, pain score, bleeding score, erythema score and other side effects were evaluated. A total of 20 participants completed the entire course. The participant's satisfaction score and PGA score increased progressively over time. Compared with the control side, the treatment side exhibited a shorter treatment time and lower pain score, but higher bleeding score. Dermal density increased gradually following FMR treatment and was statistically significant higher at 3 months than that at other follow-up time points. There were no statistically significant differences between the treatment and control sides in participant's satisfaction score, PGA score, erythema score, erythema duration and edema duration, MI, EI, SCH, sebum and dermal density at the forehead, cheek and chin of at any follow-up time point. FMR is effective and safe for skin photoaging and acne scar. Peninsula Timerevert Needle
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.