MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7081996610 · doi:10.1016/j.jdrv.2025.09.003

Adverse events of topical finasteride for male androgenetic alopecia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2025· article· en· W7081996610 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueJAAD reviews. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinasterideAdverse effectDihydrotestosteroneRandomized controlled trialPharmacokineticsScalpHair lossTestosterone (patch)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Male androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is a progressive non-scarring alopecia characterized by hair follicle miniaturization in a defined pattern.1 Although topical and oral finasteride are both prescribed to treat male AGA, topical finasteride (TF) is not FDA-approved. Recently, the FDA issued a public alert cautioning against the use of TF due to potential risks.2 Pharmacokinetic studies also reported that TF reduces scalp dihydrotestosterone (DHT) and plasma DHT, although to a lesser extent than oral finasteride, raising questions about potential systemic adverse events (AE).

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAAD reviews.Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207