Summary of findings 5. Chemical peeling versus combined chemical peeling plus any active intervention for acne scars.
| Chemical peeling versus combined chemical peeling plus any active intervention for acne scars | ||||||
| Patient or population: people with acne scars Settings: hospital‐based Intervention: chemical peeling versus combined chemical peeling plus any active intervention | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Control | Chemical peeling versus combined chemical peeling plus any active intervention | |||||
| Participant‐reported scar improvement (long‐term) N of participants with > 50% improvement in acne scars Follow‐up: mean 8 months | 800 per 1000 | 992 per 1000 (696 to 1000) | RR 1.24 (0.87 to 1.75) | 20 (1 study) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2 | ‐ |
| Participant‐reported scar improvement (short‐term) | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | This outcome was not measured |
| Investigator‐assessed adverse events (short‐term) | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | This outcome was not measured |
| Participant‐assessed adverse events (short‐term) N of participants with adverse events Follow‐up: mean 4 weeks | 1000 per 1000 | 1000 per 1000 (830 to 1000) | RR 1 (0.83 to 1.2) | 20 (1 study) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,3 | ‐ |
| Participant satisfaction | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | This outcome was not measured |
| Quality of life | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | ‐ | See comment | This outcome was not measured |
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | ||||||
1Downgraded by one level due to high risk of bias with regard to blinding of participants and personnel. 2Downgraded two levels for very serious imprecision because the optimal information size (OIS) is not met (should be around 100), very small sample size, and the 95% CI around the estimate of effect includes both no effect and appreciable benefit. 3Downgraded two levels for very serious imprecision because the optimal information size (OIS) is not met, very small sample size, and the 95% CI around the estimate of effect includes both no effect and appreciable harm.