[DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] 111.de Almeida R.R., Paim B., de Oliveira S.A., Souza A.S., Jr., Gomes A.C.P., Escuissato D.L., Zanetti G., Marchiori E
"Since vitamins and supplements are regulated differently than pharmaceuticals, it is important to have third-party verification," says Woodman
The findings cannot be directly extrapolated to female pattern hair loss without dedicated meta-analyses No standardised outcome measures: Different studies used different methods to count hairs (phototrichogram, TrichoScan, clinical photography), making direct comparison imprecise Publication bias risk: Studies showing positive results are more likely to be published than negative ones, which could inflate the apparent effect size Need for larger RCTs: The authors themselves call for larger randomised controlled trials with standardised protocols to establish optimal treatment parameters What This Means for Your Hair This meta-analysis provides the strongest evidence to date that microneedling should be considered a primary treatment for androgenetic alopecia not just an add-on to existing therapies
The Trump administration has mandated that these demonstrations remain budget-neutral to the federal government
