MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096479299 · doi:10.2147/ccid.s53580

An integral topical gel for cellulite reduction: results from a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled evaluation of efficacy

2014· article· en· W2096479299 on OpenAlexaff
Diane Bilodeau, Éric Dupont, Michel Journet, Marie-Laure Oula, Juan Gallego Gómez, Claude Léveillé, Estelle Loing

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBody Contouring and Surgery
Canadian institutionsCentre de Recherche Dermatologique du Québec Métropolitain
Fundersnot available
KeywordsButtocksMedicineCellulitePlaceboAbdomenRandomized controlled trialSurgeryCellulitisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cellulite is a serious cosmetic concern for most of the 90% of women affected by it. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical efficacy of a complex integral anti-cellulite gel. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study involved 44 healthy women, aged 25-55 years. Subjects had a normal to slightly overweight body mass index and presented slight to moderate cellulite on their thighs, buttocks, and/or hips at baseline. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the treated or placebo group and accordingly applied the active product or placebo on their hips, stomach, buttocks, and thighs, twice daily for 3 months. Skin tonicity, orange-peel aspect, and stubborn cellulite were assessed at day 0, 28, 56, and 84. A self-evaluation questionnaire was completed by all volunteers. RESULTS: At the end of the study, an average of 81% of the subjects applying the active product presented improvement in their cellulite condition versus 32% for the placebo group (all descriptors and sites combined). At day 84, skin tonicity, orange-peel appearance, and stubborn cellulite were improved in a significant manner (P<0.05) over placebo, on all studied areas. Skin tonicity improved on average by +41% for buttocks, +35% for hips, and +31% for thighs. Orange peel appearance was reduced on average by -25% for buttocks, -22% for hips, and -22% for thighs. Stubborn cellulite was reduced on average by -19% for buttocks, -24% for hips, and -22% for thighs. Circumference measurements decreased in a significant manner (P<0.05) over placebo, for the abdomen (average value of -1.1 cm) and thighs (average value of -0.8 cm). The product was well tolerated and perceived by the volunteers themselves as better performing than placebo on all criteria. CONCLUSION: All results validate the efficacy of the present integral formulation to significantly reduce signs of cellulite and reshape the silhouette.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.130
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Cosmetic and Investigational DermatologySame topicBody Contouring and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207