Randomized study comparing the efficacy and tolerance of a lipophillic hydroxy acid derivative of salicylic acid and 5% benzoyl peroxide in the treatment of facial acne vulgaris
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: New topical treatments for acne vulgaris are needed for patients who have tolerance problems with current treatments. AIMS: To compare the efficacy and tolerance of a lipophillic derivative of salicylic acid (lipo hydroxy acid or LHA) containing formulation and 5% benzoyl peroxide in subjects with acne vulgaris. METHODS: Eighty subjects with mild to moderate facial acne were randomized to receive either the LHA formulation twice a day or benzoyl peroxide once a day for 12 weeks. Efficacy and tolerance were evaluated at days 0, 28, 56 and 87. Results LHA formulation and benzoyl peroxide decreased the number of inflammatory lesions from baseline to week 12 by 44% and 47% and noninflammatory lesions by 19% and 23%, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two treatments (P = 0.748; P = 0.445). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the LHA formulation could be a treatment option to consider in mild to moderate acne vulgaris patients that are intolerant to benzoyl peroxide.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it