Secondary endpoints
±, hair loss, gastro‐intestinal adverse
HAIR LOSS
Global clinical efficacy was evaluated in an open fashion both by investigators and patients trough questionnaires converted in a 5‐point score scale. The mean global clinical efficacy was higher in group A both for investigators (differences between means 0.33 ± 0.14, 95% CI: 0.05–0.62) and patients (differences between means 0.56 ± 0.20, 95% CI: 0.16–0.96) (Figure Mean score of global clinical efficacy evaluated by: (A) investigators (Group A, In Table Distribution of recorded global clinical efficacy.The tolerability of products was evaluated by investigators (Table Tolerability of products evaluated by investigators.Tolerability of products evaluated by patients through a questionnaire based on a 10 items scale: From 1 (none) to 10 (a lot).Both the oral supplement and the therapies generally used to treat the hair loss conditions were well tolerated, as reported by investigators and patients. The investigators reported that the 97.7% of patients in Group A and the 96.1% in the group B showed a good or very good tolerability.The 84.1% of subjects in group A and the 80.0% of patients in group B declare that the used of the product/s was not problematic. In addition, no gastro‐intestinal adverse effects were reported in 86.4% and 94.1% of subjects in Group A and B, respectively.