Level of Evidence for Using Lasers and Light Procedures for Treating Melasma Using the GRADE Working Group Recommendation [38-40]
Levels of evidence for aesthetic procedures
Level of evidence |
Quality of evidence and definitions |
A: High |
Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect Several high quality studies with consistent results |
B: Moderate |
Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate One high quality study or several studies with limitations |
C: Low |
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 One or more studies with limitations |
D: Very low |
Any estimate of effect is very uncertain Expert opinion with No direct research experience One or more studies with very severe limitations |
GRADE Working Group [38], Guyatt et al. [39]
Reference |
Procedures |
Quality of evidence (A-D) |
[5-7] |
Full ablative lasering |
D (very low) |
[11, 13, 14] |
Fractional lasers |
B (moderate) |
[2-4] |
QS Nd:YAG laser |
C (low) |
[18-22, 28] |
QS Nd:YAG laser toning |
A (high) |
[26, 27, 29] |
Intense pulsed light |
C (low) |
[33, 34] |
Pulsed dye laser |
C (low) |
[37, 38] |
Copper bromide laser |
C (low) |