Based on 3 first-hand reports and 44 meta-analyses & systematic reviews in the medical literature. Ranked #2642 of 4,149 overall.
Of reports that state an outcome, 100% are positive.
Of the people who reported each effect, the share who said it got better.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses from PubMed, with their published conclusions.
At least one meta-analysis, or 5+ randomized controlled trials. The grade measures how much human research exists — read the conclusions below for what it found.
Conclusion: The main temporary adverse reactions reported by the authors were as follows: discomfort, pain, erythema, hyperpigmentation, crusting, swelling, edema, and purple and acneic appearance of the skin. Finally, our study concluded that non-ablative and ablative RF was reported to rejuvenate and improve the features of skin in all skin types.
PubMed 35856592 ↗Conclusion: Shared communication needs might explain these consistencies across studies, making colour an excellent medium for communication of emotion. As most colour-emotion correspondences were tested on an abstract level (i.e., associations), it remains to be seen whether such correspondences translate to the impact of colour on experienced emotions and specific contexts.
PubMed 39806242 ↗Conclusion: Awareness of the clinicopathological hallmarks is important to avoid underdiagnosis of MCAH and the immunohistochemical features may contribute to understanding the pathogenesis of this rare disease.
PubMed 27813137 ↗Conclusion: We found no high-quality evidence to support the use of any of the topical preparations in the prevention of stretch marks during pregnancy. There is a clear need for robust, methodologically rigorous randomised trials involving larger sample sizes to evaluate the effects of topical preparations on the development of stretch marks in pregnancy. In addition, it is important that preparations commonly used by women to prevent and treat stretch marks are evaluated within the context of robust, methodologically rigorous and adequately powered randomised trials.
PubMed 23152199 ↗As stated by users — not a recommendation. Follow the label or your doctor.
How often each side effect came up across all reports.
First-hand experiences, quoted verbatim. We show one positive and one negative where both exist.
“I'll just throw Purple Wraath out there. I liked it more than Xtend.”
User data from public discussions; research from PubMed. Information only, not medical advice — talk to a doctor before starting, stopping or combining anything. Data updated October 3, 2026. How we rate