Effects of Liquid and Bar Soaps on the Skin of Brazilian Newborns: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Compared to adults, newborns' skin has a thinner epidermis and stratum corneum with decreased hydration levels, higher transepidermal water loss, and a pH variation between 5.5 and 7.5. These characteristics can predispose to the occurrence of dryness, infections, and dermatological conditions. Water and liquid soap with adequate formulation have shown to be beneficial and safe for newborns' skin. However, studies evaluating the effect of bar soap, products widely used in Brazil and Latin America, are unknown. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare the effects of liquid and bar soaps on the term newborns' skin. METHODS: This randomized controlled, parallel, single-blind clinical trial was conducted at a public university hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. 100 healthy term newborns with no congenital anomalies, acute diseases, or dermatological conditions were randomized to use liquid soap (experimental group) or bar soap (control group). Skin pH, transepidermal water loss, stratum corneum hydration, sebum content, and skin condition were assessed before and after the first bath, at 48 h, 14 days, and 28 days after birth. These evaluations were performed on the forearm, abdomen, buttocks, and thigh. In addition, the mother's perception of soap use was also evaluated. RESULTS: Data of 100 newborns were analyzed by intention to treat. The rate of retention was 53%. Newborns exposed to the liquid soap presented significantly better skin acidification (p < 0.001) and significantly better stratum corneum hydration (p < 0.001) than the skin of newborns exposed to the bar soap, regardless of the area evaluated. There were no significant differences in transepidermal water loss, sebum content, dryness, erythema, or skin breakdown and the mother's perceptions of the use of the soaps. CONCLUSION: Newborns in the experimental group presented better skin acidification and stratum corneum hydration when compared to newborns in the control group.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".