Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37798494›Full record

ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2024

A Two-Center, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of and Satisfaction with Different Methods of ART FILLER® UNIVERSAL Injection for Correcting Moderate to Severe Nasolabial Folds in Chinese Individuals.

Ilaria Mataro, Simone La Padula

Abstract readLetterComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ilaria MataroDepartment of Plastic Reconstructive Surgery and BURNS, AORN A. Cardarelli, Via Antonio Cardarelli, 9, 80131, Napoli, NA, Italy. hilaria.mataro@gmail.com.
Simone La PadulaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Università degli studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Napoli, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The article titled "A Two-Center, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of and Satisfaction with Different Methods of ART FILLER® UNIVERSAL Injection for Correcting Moderate to Severe Nasolabial Folds in Chinese Individuals," authored by Feng et al. in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, aims to compare two hyaluronic acid (HA) injection techniques for enhancing nasolabial folds: the conventional injection method and the ligament injection method. However, concerns have arisen regarding the methodology employed in this study. Having a precise understanding of the properties of the active substance is crucial for treatment standardization. It is imperative to comprehensively grasp the key characteristics of the employed HAs to determine any potential correlation between these properties, outcomes, and the likelihood of complications. Understanding HA's rheological properties, including viscosity, elasticity, and cohesiveness, is essential for selecting the most appropriate facial filler. While recognizing the authors' contributions, we firmly believe that further analysis should encompass these factors.Level of Evidence V This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Indexed as

Cosmetic TechniquesDermal FillersChinaHumansHyaluronic AcidMulticenter Studies as TopicNasolabial FoldPersonal SatisfactionProspective StudiesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeDermal FillersHyaluronic AcidHA RheologyHyaluronic acidInjectionMethodNasolabial fold

Identifiers

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.