Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Dietary or supplementary intake of nutrients and other ingredients positively affects skin appearance.
Aims: Evaluate a multicomponent nutritional supplement on photoaged skin.
Patients/methods: This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized healthy 35- to 65-year-old women with Fitzpatrick skin types I-IV and Glogau classification types II-III to a multicomponent nutritional supplement or placebo for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was Investigator Global Assessment of overall facial appearance at week 24. Secondary endpoints included investigator- and subject-rated assessments of the face, décolletage, and hands; facial photography assessments (conducted by an independent panel of dermatologists); and instrumental measures. Analysis of variance was used to assess between-group differences (P ≤ 0.05).
Results: Of 194 randomized subjects, 171 completed the study. Subjects had a mean age of 53 years and were primarily white (81%), had Glogau II (58%) and Fitzpatrick III (45%; significantly more supplement subjects had Fitzpatrick III [54%] vs. placebo [35%]; P = 0.039). At week 24, Investigator Global Assessment of overall facial appearance was numerically but not statistically better for supplement over placebo (mean difference: 0.14 [95% confidence interval: -0.16-0.44]; P = 0.358). A significant treatment-by-site interaction (P = 0.073) was observed; by-site analyses revealed a significant difference at one of three geographical sites for supplement vs. placebo (P = 0.001). Differences on secondary endpoints were generally not significant.
Conclusions: In the first multicenter study conducted with this multicomponent nutritional supplement, no significantly greater effects vs. placebo were observed on the primary endpoint, perhaps because of significant between-site variability.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jocd.12290 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!