NICEVIVA
DRUG INTERACTION RECORDED 1 Prescription Drug Interaction(s) Reported — Review the pharmacokinetic interaction matrix below before use.
Pharmacokinetic Alert
MONOGRAPH SPEC LATEST 2026

Vitamin E (Skin)

SKIN HAIR · Evidence Monograph

Vitamin E (Skin) is an evidence-graded skin hair monograph evaluated across 30 peer-reviewed PubMed studies (7 meta-analyses, 2 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials, encompassing n = 185,008 cumulative participants). Current clinical evidence is rated GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) for targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support.

Evidence Grade (GRADE) High (4.0 / 4.0)
Indexed PubMed Studies 30 Studies
Meta-Analyses · Reviews 7 Meta · 2 Systematic Reviews
Randomized Trials (RCT) 5 RCTs (1 Double-Blind)
Cumulative Participants n = 185,008
Reported Trial Dosages 150 μg · 70 g/day
Trial Duration Range 6 months · 8 weeks · 13 weeks
Reading Time ~15 min
RECOMMENDED FOR Clinical Indication

Evidence Supports Supplementation When:

  1. 01 Individuals seeking evidence-backed support for targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support (supported by 30 indexed PubMed studies, GRADE High).
  2. 02 Adults matching clinical trial dosing protocols (150 μg · 70 g/day) over a structured 6 months evaluation window.
  3. 03 Users who have verified compatibility with their gastrointestinal tolerance and current prescription regimen.
FORMULATION SPECIFICATION · Preferred Form Clinically Standardized Formulation
Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.
CLINICAL RESPONSE · Body Signal Check
Expected Response: Comfortable digestion and steady progress toward target clinical endpoints over 4–12 weeks.
Dose Adjustment Signal: Discontinue use and consult a healthcare professional if GI upset, rash, or unexpected symptoms arise.
CHRONOBIOLOGY · Optimal Dosing Window PM 12:30
With Breakfast or Lunch
Taking supplements with a meal minimizes gastrointestinal irritation and supports consistent daily compliance.
Primary Clinical Endpoints & Physiological Biomarkers Studied Based on Indexed PubMed Trials
cancer (PubMed clinical endpoint)
skin (PubMed clinical endpoint)
01

What Is Vitamin E (Skin) & Why Does Form Matter?

Vitamin E (Skin) is classified under SKIN HAIR and has been investigated across 30 peer-reviewed PubMed publications for its role in targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support.

In clinical nutrition, physiological efficacy depends heavily on the specific chemical salt, chelate, or standardized extract used, as well as adherence to trial-validated dosing (150 μg, 70 g/day).

02

Who Benefits Most & Common Depletion Factors

Suboptimal status or increased physiological demand for Vitamin E (Skin) frequently arises from restrictive dietary patterns, age-related declines in gastrointestinal absorption, chronic metabolic stress, or medication-induced nutrient depletion.

Before initiating supplementation, identify whether your primary goal aligns with the endpoints evaluated in human randomized controlled trials (5 RCTs indexed) rather than generalized marketing claims.

03

Physiological Mechanism of Action

Within human physiology, Vitamin E (Skin) acts on pathways governing targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support. Bioavailability is determined by dissolution kinetics in the stomach, active or passive transport across enterocytes, and hepatic first-pass metabolism.

Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.

04

PubMed Clinical Evidence & GRADE Evaluation

NICEVIVA assigns Vitamin E (Skin) an overall evidence rating of GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) based on 30 PubMed studies: 7 meta-analyses, 2 systematic reviews, and 5 randomized controlled trials (1 double-blind, n = 185,008 total participants).

Representative peer-reviewed findings include: • PMID:42075548 (2026) — "Rosacea and Hippophae rhamnoides: A Phytonutrient Approach to Skin Repair (The Systematic Review)." (Conclusions: Hippophae rhamnoides shows promising anti-inflammatory and skin-repairing effects that may benefit patients with rosacea.) • PMID:42074404 (2026) — "Mobile Cancer Screening Programs: A Systematic Review of Implementation Challenges and Population Access." (CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the potential of mobile screening units as public health strategies to expand access to cancer screening while underscoring the need for stronger implementation frameworks and long-term evaluation of program outcomes.) • PMID:42069660 (2026) — "Periosteal distraction-related treatments for diabetic foot/diabetic foot ulcer: a systematic review and meta-analysis." (CONCLUSIONS: Current findings do not support a clear superiority of pure PD over TTT.)

Quantitative Clinical Effect-Size Distribution (Forest Plot)

Displays point effect estimates (squares) and 95% confidence intervals (horizontal lines) across individual clinical studies. Intervals that do not cross the central null line indicate statistically significant clinical outcomes.

Study (PMID · Year)RR Effect Size & 95% CI DistributionEstimate (95% CI)PMID 420678870.82 (0.68–0.99)PMID 420380691.420.2Null (1)5Metric: RR
05

Formulation Selection, Dosing & Chronobiology

Recommended Formulation: Clinically Standardized Formulation. Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.

Clinical Trial Dosing & Timing: Published studies most commonly utilize 150 μg · 70 g/day over 6 months · 8 weeks · 13 weeks · 3 months. Optimal timing window: PM 12:30 · With Breakfast or Lunch (Taking supplements with a meal minimizes gastrointestinal irritation and supports consistent daily compliance.).

06

Body Response Monitoring & Dose Adjustment

Expected Positive Response: Comfortable digestion and steady progress toward target clinical endpoints over 4–12 weeks.

Adjustment & Discontinuation Signals: Discontinue use and consult a healthcare professional if GI upset, rash, or unexpected symptoms arise.

07

Prescription Drug Interactions & Contraindications

• [MAJOR] Warfarin: Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction reported in clinical literature (DrugBank:DB00682, PMID:15050579). Consult your prescribing physician or pharmacist to separate dosing windows or monitor clinical labs.

08

4 Essential Safety Rules Before & After Dosing

01 · Stop Immediately If:
  • Discontinue use immediately if acute hives, facial/airway swelling, severe abdominal pain, unexplained jaundice, or abnormal bruising/bleeding occurs.
  • Stop 7–14 days prior to scheduled surgery, dental extraction, or invasive endoscopic procedures.
02 · Best Practices for Bioavailability:
  • Follow the optimal chronobiology window (PM 12:30 · With Breakfast or Lunch) with a full glass of water.
  • Stay within clinically studied daily dosages (150 μg · 70 g/day) and re-evaluate efficacy after 6 months.
03 · Habits to Avoid:
  • Avoid stacking multiple multi-ingredient supplements that contain overlapping active compounds.
  • Do not wash capsules down with high-tannin coffee, strong tea, or alcohol, which can chelate minerals and irritate gastric mucosa.
04 · Consult Physician / Pharmacist Before Use If:
  • Consult your physician or pharmacist before use if taking Warfarin.
  • Seek professional medical guidance if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or managing chronic kidney or liver disease.
09 · PUBMED CLINICAL STUDIES

Indexed PubMed Clinical Studies & Abstracts (30 Studies) · 15 Quantitative Analyses

01
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) (2026) PMID: 42075548 ↗
Rosacea and Hippophae rhamnoides: A Phytonutrient Approach to Skin Repair (The Systematic Review).
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Systematic Review published in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania). Key conclusion: Conclusions: Hippophae rhamnoides shows promising anti-inflammatory and skin-repairing effects that may benefit patients with rosacea.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Background and Objectives: Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory dermatosis with a complex pathophysiology that continues to challenge effective long-term disease management. Rosacea is characterized by immune dysregulation, oxidative stress, neurovascular dysfunction, and impaired epidermal barrier integrity, while current therapeutic options remain limited. Hippophae rhamnoides (sea buckthorn) is a phytochemically rich medicinal plant with reported anti-inflammatory and dermo-reparative properties. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines using the PubMed database. Studies published from 2020 onward evaluating sea buckthorn extracts, oils, or isolate bioactive compounds in the in vitro, in vivo, and limited clinical contexts were included, with emphasis on rosacea relevant mechanisms. Results: Twenty-six studies show that sea buckthorn compounds modulate inflammation, oxidative stress, vascular and immune responses, and barrier function in preclinical models. They consistently reduce pro-inflammatory mediators, improve barrier integrity, and attenuate immune or vascular activation, suggesting potential benefits for inflammatory skin disorders such as rosacea. Conclusions: Hippophae rhamnoides shows promising anti-inflammatory and skin-repairing effects that may benefit patients with rosacea. However, most evidence comes from preclinical studies, and clinical data specifically for rosacea are limited. Well-designed clinical trials are needed to confirm its effectiveness in treating this condition.

02
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW International journal of environmental research and public health (2026) PMID: 42074404 ↗
Mobile Cancer Screening Programs: A Systematic Review of Implementation Challenges and Population Access.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Systematic Review published in International journal of environmental research and public health involving n = 37 participants. Key conclusion: CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the potential of mobile screening units as public health strategies to expand access to cancer screening while underscoring the need for stronger implementation frameworks and long-term evaluation of program outcomes.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to synthesize evidence on the design characteristics, implementation considerations, and operational challenges of mobile cancer screening units. METHODS: A PRISMA-guided review was conducted. Data extracted included screening type, target population, program characteristics, mobile unit features, and reported implementation barriers. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). RESULTS: Sixty-four articles published across 13 countries met the inclusion criteria. Most interventions focused on breast cancer screening (n = 37), followed by lung (n = 11), cervical (n = 6), colorectal, skin, prostate, and multi-cancer screening programs. MSUs were most frequently deployed in urban areas (21 urban/18 rural/17 both). Several comparative studies (fixed programs vs. MSUs) reported higher screening uptake in mobile programs, although findings varied substantially by setting, population, and study design. However, adherence and clinical outcomes varied, often reflecting baseline socioeconomic differences in the populations served. Common implementation barriers included follow-up coordination challenges, program costs, equipment and space limitations, and gaps in referral and reimbursement systems. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight the potential of mobile screening units as public health strategies to expand access to cancer screening while underscoring the need for stronger implementation frameworks and long-term evaluation of program outcomes.

03
META-ANALYSIS Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research (2026) PMID: 42069660 ↗
Periosteal distraction-related treatments for diabetic foot/diabetic foot ulcer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research. Key conclusion: CONCLUSIONS: Current findings do not support a clear superiority of pure PD over TTT.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Periosteal distraction (PD) has been used as a salvage strategy for diabetic foot (DF) and diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), yet its relative effectiveness compared with other approaches is still unclear. METHODS: Up to March 17, 2026, seven databases were searched for comparative studies assessing PD-related treatments in DF/DFU. Twenty-six studies were included for qualitative synthesis, and 14 contributed to the primary comparative evidence set. The studies were organized into three categories: PD-based interventions versus conventional treatment, pure PD versus transverse tibial transport (TTT), and PD-inclusive multimodal regimens versus non-equivalent regimens. RESULTS: A formal pooled meta-analysis could not be performed for Group A, so this group was synthesized descriptively. For Group B, pure PD showed no statistically significant differences from TTT with respect to ABI, pain, or adverse events. For Group C, PD-containing multimodal regimens were linked with beneficial short-term changes in surrogate perfusion-related measures (ABI, skin temperature, toe oxygen) and pain. However, when wound/ulcer healing time was pooled, the results suggested only a non-significant tendency favoring PD-containing multimodal regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Current findings do not support a clear superiority of pure PD over TTT. Apparent advantages were mainly seen in PD-containing multimodal regimens and were largely restricted to short-term surrogate outcomes. These findings should not be interpreted as evidence that PD alone has an independent effect, and robust limb-salvage endpoints remain insufficiently reported. © 2026. The Author(s).

04
META-ANALYSIS BMC surgery (2026) PMID: 42067887 ↗
Robotic versus conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy in early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in BMC surgery involving n = 2,312 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.04 (RR 0.82). Key conclusion: However, no statistically significant differences were observed betw
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically compare robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-NSM) with conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (C-NSM) in terms of perioperative safety and oncological outcomes through a meta-analysis. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from database inception to February 27, 2026. Controlled studies comparing robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-NSM) and conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (C-NSM) in women with early-stage breast cancer (stage 0-II, including a small proportion of risk-reducing mastectomy cases) were included. Study selection and data extraction were independently performed by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Statistical analyses were conducted using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4. The primary outcomes were overall postoperative complications, major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III), positive surgical margin, and local recurrence. Secondary outcomes included operative time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, reoperation rate, and individual postoperative complications (including nipple-areolar complex necrosis, skin-flap necrosis, surgical-site infection, hematoma, seroma, delayed wound healing, and implant loss). Perioperative mortality was not reported in the included studies. RESULTS: A total of 12 studies involving 2,312 patients (1 RCT and 11 non-randomized studies) were included in the quantitative synthesis. The reported follow-up duration across included studies ranged from 3 to approximately 51 months, with most studies reporting a median or mean follow-up of around 18-30 months. Compared with C-NSM, R-NSM was associated with a lower incidence of overall postoperative complications (RR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.68-0.99, P = 0.04) and major complications defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III (RR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.22-0.86, P = 0.02). R-NSM was also associated with a reduced risk of delayed wound healing (RR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.26-0.98, P = 0.04). However, no statistically significant differences were observed betw

05
META-ANALYSIS Veterinary research communications (2026) PMID: 42065810 ↗
Prevalence and antibiotic resistance profile of Staphylococcus pseudintermedius in pyodermic dogs in Asia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in Veterinary research communications; statistical significance reported at p = 0.001. Key conclusion: Meta-regression revealed no significant difference between MSSP and MRSP prevalence (p = 0.853).
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

Staphylococcus pseudintermedius is the primary bacterial agent associated with canine pyoderma, with rising concern over methicillin-resistant strains in Asia. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the prevalence of methicillin-susceptible (MSSP) and methicillin-resistant (MRSP) S. pseudintermedius from canine skin infections and to evaluate their antimicrobial resistance profiles. Following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) guidelines, studies published between 2015 and 2024 were retrieved from Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google. Only cross-sectional studies from Asian countries reporting disk diffusion susceptibility testing in dogs with pyoderma were included. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria, with overall moderate methodological quality. Fourteen studies were included in prevalence analyses. The pooled prevalence of MSSP was 27.9% (95% CI: 18.8-39.3) and MRSP was 30.7% (95% CI: 21.3-42.1), with high heterogeneity between the included studies (I2 = 93.85%; p < 0.001). The pooled prevalence of the mecA gene among MRSP was 11.9%. Meta-regression revealed no significant difference between MSSP and MRSP prevalence (p = 0.853). MSSP isolates had the lowest resistance to amoxicillin-clavulanic acid and oxacillin, whereas MRSP exhibited broader resistance, particularly to oxacillin, clindamycin, and doxycycline. These findings highlight the substantial burden of MRSP in canine pyoderma in Asia and reinforce the need for susceptibility-guided therapy and strengthened antimicrobial stewardship. © 2026. The Author(s).

06
META-ANALYSIS Medicine (2026) PMID: 42065185 ↗
Meta-analysis of the skin redraping method and the Z-plasty method in the correction of epicanthus.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in Medicine involving n = 1,539 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.53 (OR 13.73). Key conclusion: Within the limited follow-up period of the included studies (up to 6 months), Z-plasty was associated with better scar appearance, higher satisfaction, and lower recurrence.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Epicanthus, a prevalent aesthetic concern in Asian populations, can be surgically corrected using various techniques. The skin redraping method and Z-plasty are 2 widely adopted approaches. This study aimed to conduct a systematic meta-analysis to comprehensively compare the clinical efficacy and outcomes of these 2 dominant surgical methods for epicanthus correction. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed across PubMed, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, and VIP databases from their inception through December 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies directly comparing skin redraping and Z-plasty for congenital epicanthus were eligible. Primary outcomes included postoperative change in intercanthal distance (ICD), scar assessment via the Vancouver Scar Scale at 6 months, patient satisfaction, recurrence rate, and incidence of complications. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. Statistical synthesis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 and R metafor package, employing fixed-effect or random-effects models based on heterogeneity (I2 statistic). RESULTS: Fourteen studies (1539 patients) were included. All included studies were published in Chinese. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in postoperative ICD reduction (mean difference = 0.56 mm, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.20 to 2.33, P = .53, I2 = 98%). Z-plasty yielded significantly better 6-month Vancouver Scar Scale scores (mean difference = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.31-0.57, P < .00001) and higher patient satisfaction (odds ratio [OR] = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.18-0.84, P = .02). Recurrence was significantly lower with Z-plasty (OR = 13.73, 95% CI: 2.53-74.49, P = .002), although this analysis was based on only 3 studies. Complication rates were similar (OR = 1.45, 95% CI: 0.65-3.23, P = .36). CONCLUSION: Both techniques effectively reduce ICD with comparable safety. Within the limited follow-up period of the included studies (up to 6 months), Z-plasty was associated with better scar appearance, higher satisfaction, and lower recurrence. The high heterogeneity

07
META-ANALYSIS Journal of wound care (2026) PMID: 42060500 ↗
Incidence and risk factors of medical adhesive-related skin injury among ICU patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in Journal of wound care involving n = 5,218 participants (OR 0.733). Key conclusion: Improved strategies for identifying and clinically managing MARSI in ICU patients are needed.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: To summarise the evidence regarding the incidence and risk factors of medical adhesive-related skin injury (MARSI) among patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHOD: A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken using articles available in nine databases: PubMed; the Cochrane Library; Web of Science; Embase; CINAHL; Chinese Biomedical Literature Database; China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database; Wanfang Database; and Weipu Database, from inception until 30 June 2024. Additional studies were identified by examining the references of relevant articles. The Stata 16.0 statistical platform (StataCorp LLC, US) was used for analysis. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality standards. RESULTS: Of 14,743 titles screened, 19 studies involving 5218 patients were included in the systematic review. The pooled incidence of MARSI was 21% (95% confidence interval (CI): 14%, 28%), and the incidence of MARSI among neonatal ICU, paediatric ICU and adult ICU was 15% (95% CI: 6%, 26%), 48% (95% CI: 35%, 60%) and 16% (95% CI: 11%, 22%), respectively. Significant risk factors in adult ICUs included oedema (odds ratio (OR): 8.144; 95%CI: 3.267, 20.304), Braden scale score (OR: 0.733; 95%CI: 0.641, 0.837), length of ICU stay (OR: 1.072; 95%CI: 1.026, 1.120), mechanical ventilation (OR: 3.698; 95%CI: 1.900, 7.199), sedative use (OR: 6.022; 95%CI: 2.859, 12.687), Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 score (OR: 4.241; 95%CI: 1.984, 9.065) and hypoalbuminaemia (OR: 4.321; 95%CI: 1.967, 9.488). CONCLUSION: This study found that MARSI is prevalent among ICU patients and is associated with multiple risk factors. Improved strategies for identifying and clinically managing MARSI in ICU patients are needed. Nevertheless, large-sample and multicentre studies are still warranted to validate the present study's findings.

08
META-ANALYSIS Frontiers in oncology (2026) PMID: 42057831 ↗
Efficacy and safety of ALA/MLA photodynamic therapy for superficial and nodular basal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in Frontiers in oncology involving n = 2,123 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.00001. Key conclusion: The pooled beauty effect rate for nBCC was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.83-0.96, p<0.00001), with a pooled recurrence rate of 0.15 (95% CI: 0.10-0.20, p<0.00001); adverse event data were insufficient for pooling, with individual studies reporting mild, manageable local reactions.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most prevalent non-melanoma skin cancer, with surgical excision as the gold standard-though it carries risks of cosmetic scarring and functional impairment. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) using 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) or methyl aminolevulinate (MAL) emerges as a non-invasive alternative, yet evidence on its relative efficacy across superficial (sBCC) and nodular (nBCC) subtypes remains inconsistent. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to PRISMA 2020 guidelines, with a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to December 31, 2025. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and single-arm studies evaluating ALA-PDT/MLA-PDT for histologically confirmed sBCC or nBCC. Study quality was assessed via the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) scale, and statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4. RESULTS: A comprehensive literature search identified 3832 records, with 55 eligible studies (41 for sBCC, 34 for nBCC) ultimately included, involving 2123 patients and 2995 lesions. For sBCC, the pooled complete response (CR) rate was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.85-0.91, p<0.00001) with high heterogeneity (I²=87%); no significant difference in CR rate was observed between ALA-PDT (0.87) and MAL-PDT (0.90) (p=0.47), and BF-200 ALA-PDT achieved a CR rate of 0.90. The pooled beauty effect rate for sBCC was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87-0.95, p<0.00001), with a low pooled adverse event incidence of 0.08 (95% CI: 0.03-0.14, p=0.004) and a pooled recurrence rate of 0.13 (95% CI: 0.09-0.18, p<0.00001). For nBCC, the pooled CR rate was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.70-0.80, p<0.00001, I²=92%), with MAL-PDT (0.78) showing a statistically significant higher CR rate than ALA-PDT (0.69) (p=0.04); BF-200 ALA-PDT and AFL-MAL-PDT achieved CR rates of 0.89 and 0.84, respectively. The pooled beauty effect rate for nBCC was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.83-0.96, p<0.00001), with a pooled recurrence rate of 0.15 (95% CI: 0.10-0.20, p<0.00001); adverse event data were insufficient for pooling, with individual studies reporting mild, manageable local reactions. Subgroup analyses revealed

09
CLINICAL STUDY Frontiers in medicine (2026) PMID: 42051701 ↗
National-, institutional-, and individual-level determinants of dermatologic research excellence: an analysis of Stanford-Elsevier Lists of the top 2% scholars worldwide (2017-2023).
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Clinical Study published in Frontiers in medicine (MD 84.1). Key conclusion: CONCLUSION: Dermatologic research excellence remains concentrated in high-income, predominantly European and Anglophone ecosystems, within a small cadre of elite institutions and among older, male scholars.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Skin diseases contribute to a massive and often overlooked component of the global disease burden, highlighting the need for a better understanding of the dermatologic research landscape and its key drivers of excellence. AIM: To explore the national, institutional, and individual-level determinants that shape dermatologic research excellence worldwide. METHODS: We analyzed the publicly available Stanford-Elsevier Lists of the top 2% most-cited scientists (2017-2023), extracting scholars classified in Dermatology & Venereal Diseases to identify excellent dermatologic scholars (EDS). EDS records were then linked, based on affiliation data, to country-level indicators (Universal Health Coverage [UHC], Human Development Index [HDI], Gender Inequality Index [GII], national budgets, and disease burden), institutional rankings (Quacquarelli Symonds [QS], Times Higher Education [THE], and Academic Ranking of World Universities [ARWU]), and individual attributes (gender and academic age). Outcomes were EDS counts by country/institution and scholar-level bibliometrics (citations excluding self-citations, modified H-index, and composite score). RESULTS: EDS were overwhelmingly based in high-income countries (97.9% career-long; 94.5% single-year) with the EURO region contributing ~48% of EDS and exhibiting highest densities (0.585 and 0.482 per 100,000), while low-income settings had ~0.002. The top 20 institutions hosted ~21% of all EDS. Women comprised 22.9% (career-long) and 28.6% (single-year) of EDS; men had higher median citations and modified H-indices. Academic age correlated positively with modified H-index (ρ = 0.312 career-long) and C-score (ρ = 0.145 single-year), and each additional year predicted higher citations (β = 84.1 career-long; β = 2.6 single-year). In adjusted models, higher HDI and UHC aligned with higher citation counts. CONCLUSION: Dermatologic research excellence remains concentrated in high-income, predominantly European and Anglophone ecosystems, within a small cadre of elite institutions and among older, male scholars. Policymakers should focus on targeted funding for under-represented regions and institutional reforms to ensure eq

10
META-ANALYSIS Frontiers in psychiatry (2026) PMID: 42038069 ↗
The efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation in patients with ADHD: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2026 Meta-Analysis published in Frontiers in psychiatry involving n = 1,864 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.05 (RR 1.42). Key conclusion: CONCLUSION: tDCS was well-tolerated but did not demonstrate significant overall efficacy for core ADHD symptoms or executive functions.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) for treating Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, we analyzed 28 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1,864 participants. Outcomes encompassed core ADHD symptoms, hot and cold executive functions (EFs)-including inhibitory control, working memory, and cognitive flexibility-as well as safety profiles based on adverse events. A multilevel meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses and meta-regressions were conducted to explore potential moderating factors. RESULTS: Compared to sham stimulation, tDCS did not significantly improve core ADHD symptoms (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.29, 95% CI [-0.59, 0.01], p= 0.05). Similarly, no significant overall effects were observed for cold EFs: inhibitory control (Hedges' g(g)= -0.11, 95% CI [-0.26, 0.05], p=0.19), working memory (g= 0.13, 95% CI [-0.06, 0.32], p= 0.26), or cognitive flexibility (SMD = -0.42, 95% CI [-1.13, 0.29], p= 0.24). The effect on hot EFs was also non-significant (g = 0.27, 95% CI [-0.14, 0.70], p = 0.19). Exploratory analyses indicated that anode placement at Fp2 was associated with improvement in both inhibitory control (g= -0.52, 95% CI [-0.93, -0.11], p=0.01) and working memory (g = 0.72, 95% CI [0.22, 1.22], p = 0.004), although the overall test for interaction was not significant for inhibitory control (p= 0.19). The most common adverse reactions were mild and transient local skin symptoms, such as itching and redness (RR = 1.42, p=0.04). CONCLUSION: tDCS was well-tolerated but did not demonstrate significant overall efficacy for core ADHD symptoms or executive functions. Anodal stimulation at Fp2 showed potential selective benefits warranting further investigation. tDCS is not currently recommended as a standalone treatment for ADHD. Future research should optimize stimulation protocols and explore combined interventions with behavioral or cognitive therapies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42024612055.

RELATED MONOGRAPHS

Related Monographs in This Category