The tolerability profile of clindamycin 1%/benzoyl peroxide 5% gel vs. adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel for facial acne: results of a randomized, single‐blind, split‐face study

Gonzalez, Pablo; Vila, Ricardo; Cirigliano, Marcela

doi:10.1111/jocd.12013

Cited by 22 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1,2, Three studies prohibited the use of moisturizers, while other studies provided or allowed moisturizer use. 5,7,10 In all studies, tolerability (including erythema, dryness, scaling, and burning) had been reported using different scales ranging from none to severe for each category. For each study, results had been analyzed to determine whether there was statistically significant difference in tolerability to the retinoids.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tolerability of Topical Retinoids

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tolerability of Topical Retinoids

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A post hoc analysis, which was conducted to determine on which side of the face AEs occurred, indicated that treatment related AEs, including irritation, dryness, and erythema, were significantly less common with C/BPO than the adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel (A/BPO) (P≤0.01)." 67 Example 3-"Minor and transient adverse reactions included herpes simplex virus reactivation (confined to the lips) (one patient, 3.5%)." 68 Explanation-Presentation of harms or unintended effects at the body site (examples 1 and 2) and at the participant level (example 3) is important for within person randomised trials.…”

Section: Item 19: Harmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

CONSORT 2010 statement: extension checklist for reporting within person randomised trials

Pandis

Chung

Scherer

et al. 2017

BMJ

194

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence shows that the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. The lack of transparent reporting impedes readers from judging the reliability and validity of trial findings and researchers from extracting information for systematic reviews and results in research waste. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement was developed to improve the reporting of RCTs. Within person trials are used for conditions that can affect two or more body sites, and are a useful and efficient tool because the comparisons between interventions are within people. Such trials are most commonly conducted in ophthalmology, dentistry, and dermatology. The reporting of within person trials has, however, been variable and incomplete, hindering their use in clinical decision making and by future researchers. This document presents the CONSORT extension to within person trials. It aims to facilitate the reporting of these trials. It extends 16 items of the CONSORT 2010 checklist and introduces a modified flowchart and baseline table to enhance transparency. Examples of good reporting and evidence based rationale for CONSORT within person checklist items are provided.

show abstract

“…There were no serious AEs. A post hoc analysis, which was conducted to determine on which side of the face AEs occurred, indicated that treatment related AEs, including irritation, dryness, and erythema, were significantly less common with C/BPO than the adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel (A/BPO) (P≤0.01).”…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

CONSORT 2010 statement: extension checklist for reporting within person randomised trials

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Evidence shows that the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. The lack of transparent reporting impedes readers from judging the reliability and validity of trial findings and researchers from extracting information for systematic reviews and results in research waste. The Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement was developed to improve the reporting of RCTs. Within person trials are used for conditions that can affect two or more body sites, and are a useful and efficient tool because the comparisons between interventions are within people. Such trials are most commonly conducted in ophthalmology, dentistry, and dermatology. The reporting of within person trials has, however, been variable and incomplete, hindering their use in clinical decision making and by future researchers. This document presents the CONSORT extension to within person trials. It aims to facilitate the reporting of these trials. It extends 16 items of the CONSORT 2010 checklist and introduces a modified flowchart and baseline table to enhance transparency. Examples of good reporting and evidence based rationale for CONSORT within person checklist items are provided.

show abstract

The tolerability profile of clindamycin 1%/benzoyl peroxide 5% gel vs. adapalene 0.1%/benzoyl peroxide 2.5% gel for facial acne: results of a randomized, single‐blind, split‐face study

Abstract: Clindamycin/BPO had a better tolerability profile than adapalene/BPO during 2 weeks of split-face treatment. Treatment satisfaction was highest with clindamycin/BPO.

Cited by 22 publications

References 7 publications

Tolerability of Topical Retinoids

Tolerability of Topical Retinoids

CONSORT 2010 statement: extension checklist for reporting within person randomised trials

CONSORT 2010 statement: extension checklist for reporting within person randomised trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About