MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386893863 · doi:10.3390/cosmetics10050131

Topical AHA in Dermatology: Formulations, Mechanisms of Action, Efficacy, and Future Perspectives

2023· article· en· W4386893863 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCosmetics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSkin Protection and Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBiochemical engineeringComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utilization of topical formulations containing alpha hydroxy acids (AHAs) has garnered considerable attention. This review summarizes the effectiveness of the most common topical AHA formulations, including mechanisms of action and future research directions. AHAs have a dramatic impact on diverse skin conditions, enhancing texture and stimulating collagen synthesis. Uncertainties persist regarding optimal concentration, pH, and vehicle for maximum efficacy. Advancements in formulation technologies offer opportunities for AHA penetration and stability. Understanding mechanisms is vital for skincare optimization. The review covers AHAs, their concentrations, formulation considerations, safety measures, and future directions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.295 · 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