wat is eigenlijk bewezen over het vrouwelijk lichaam na veertig

Haar en nagels

Evidence-based treatments for female pattern hair loss: a summary of a Cochrane systematic review.

5 Herhaald bewijs

Hoe zwaar dit weegt: verschillende onderzoeken bij mensen, gecombineerd — het sterkste bewijs dat er is.
Type onderzoek
meta-analyse of systematische review
Onderzocht bij
mensen
Deelnemers
2,349
Gepubliceerd
2013 in The British journal of dermatology
Geciteerd
14 keer aangehaald door ander onderzoek
Wie betaalde
Niet aangegeven. PubMed bevat voor de meeste artikelen geen verklaring van belangenconflicten; dat is niet hetzelfde als onafhankelijk.
Bron
PubMed 23039053 · doi 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2012.11166.x
De uitleg in begrijpelijke taal van dit onderzoek wordt nog geschreven. Hieronder staat de samenvatting precies zoals de onderzoekers die hebben gepubliceerd.
Samenvatting door de onderzoekers — originele tekst

Female pattern hair loss (FPHL) or androgenic alopecia is the most common type of hair loss affecting women with reduced hair density and can have a serious psychological impact. It is characterized by progressive replacement of slow cycling terminal hair follicles by miniaturized, rapidly cycling vellus hair follicles. The frontal hair line may or may not be preserved. The aim of this review was to assess the evidence for the effectiveness and safety of the treatments available for FPHL. Searches included: Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, LILACS and several ongoing trials registries (October 2011). Randomized controlled trials in women with FPHL were identified. Twenty-two trials, comprising 2349 participants, were included. A range of interventions was evaluated, with 10 studies examining varying concentrations of minoxidil. Pooled data from four studies indicated that a greater proportion of participants treated with minoxidil reported a moderate increase in their hair regrowth compared with placebo (relative risk 1·86, 95% confidence interval 1·42-2·43). There was no difference between the number of adverse events experienced in the twice daily minoxidil and the placebo intervention groups, except for a reported increase with minoxidil 5% twice daily. Single studies accounted for most of the other comparisons, which were assessed as either having high risk of bias and/or they did not address the prespecified outcomes for this review and provided limited evidence of either the effectiveness or safety of these interventions. Further well-designed, adequately powered randomized controlled trials investigating other treatment options are still required.