Efficacy of Modified Qufeng Runmian Powder (加减祛风润面散) on Acne Vulgaris with Syndromes of Dampness and Blood Stasis: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Zhang, Tian-Bo; Bai, Yuling; Yang, Haoyu; Liu, Jiu-Li; Cao, Ri-Qu; Wu, Zhi‐Yong; Liu, Yu‐Chao

doi:10.1007/s11655-020-3214-4

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The former was recommended in text book of China Clinical Dermatology edited by Zhao Bian, and the latter was reported in Guideline for diagnosis and treatment of acne vulgaris in 2019 9,10 . However, studies were conducted in China using different acne grading systems including GAGS, GEA, acne severity index (ASS), acne severity score (ASS), and so on, rarely using AGS and IIGS 15,18–20 . It is necessary to compare AGS, IIGS with other assessment tools especially IGA and GEA to assess whether these two tools are suitable for clinical practice and project research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inter‐rater variability and consistency within four acne grading systems recommended in China, USA, and Europe

Fei

Xiaoli

et al. 2022

J of Cosmetic Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To investigate the correlation among different investigators (intrarater variation) in the assessment of acne vulgaris severity using Acne Grading System (AGS), International Improvement Grading System (IIGS), Investigator Global Assessment of acne (IGA), and Global Evaluation Acne (GEA), and to compare AGS and IIGS with the IGA recommended in the United States, and GEA in Europe. Methods:A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted among patients with acne vulgaris, attending the dermatology outpatient clinics at five hospitals in China.Four investigators were engaged using AGS, IIGS, IGA, and GEA to assess severity of acne vulgaris. Correlation among AGS, IIGS, GEA, and IGA were analyzed.Results: A total of 1107 participants suffering from acne vulgaris were enrolled. There was evidence of adequate internal consistency among AGS, IIGS, IGA, and GEA. For the intrarater reliability, AGS, IIGS, GEA, and IGA demonstrated excellent reliability.Moreover, AGS, IIGS, IGA, and GEA were significantly correlated with each other (p ≤ 0.01). Conclusion:IIGS and AGS were reliable, and correlated well with IGA and GEA.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…15,[18][19][20] It is necessary to compare AGS, IIGS with other assessment tools especially IGA and GEA to assess whether these two tools are suitable for clinical practice and project research. To…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%