ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2026
The forehead and glabella show pronounced
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Acne vulgaris is a prevalent chronic inflammatory skin disease, and Cutibacterium overproliferation is a core pathogenic factor, yet findings remain controversial, partly due to single anatomical area sampling bias. Methods: We conducted a crosssectional study with anatomically paired sampling across multiple facial anatomical areas in 85 subjects (30 healthy subjects, 55 acne subjects), analyzing 763 samples from 6 facial anatomical areas for 16S rRNA V4 region sequencing and microbial community analysis. Results: At the whole-face level, acne subjects had a significantly higher relative abundance of Cutibacterium and Staphylococcus compared with healthy subjects. Critically, Cutibacterium enrichment was highly dependent on facial anatomical areas: only the forehead and glabella showed significant intergroup differences, with the forehead showing a 127% higher median relative abundance (adjusted Discussion: This study demonstrates the facial anatomical area specificity of Cutibacterium enrichment, identifies the forehead and glabella as the areas with pronounced relative abundance differences between acne and healthy groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.