← Back to SkinReset
Clinical Proof: In-Vivo SkinReset in 8 Weeks
What our independent study actually showed
This is what happens when you combine patent-pending dual-encapsulated PDRN with rigorous clinical validation. After 8 weeks, 30 participants experienced measurable improvements across hydration, anti-ageing, and skin barrier function — validated through dermatological assessment, instrumental measurement, and advanced 3D imaging.
Here's exactly what the data showed.
Baseline
Week 8
Subject [ID] · Under-eye fine lines: −38.5% at Week 8 · Standardized VISIA capture · Unretouched
Study Snapshot
Participants
33 enrolled
30 completed
30 completed
Duration
8 Weeks
Visits
3
Baseline · Wk4 · Wk8
Baseline · Wk4 · Wk8
Endpoints
21
Measured
Measured
Modalities
3
Independent
Independent
Results
18 of 21
p < 0.0001
p < 0.0001
33
Enrolled Subjects
18
Significant Results
3
Measurement Methods
Why Measure What Others Don't
Most skincare brands make claims without backing them up. SkinReset is different.
We designed this study to answer a specific question: Does dual-encapsulated PDRN actually work better than conventional formulations? And if so, how much better, and where?
We couldn't answer that with marketing claims or ingredient hype. We needed real data from real people, measured by multiple independent methods, validated by statistics. This is the study that did it.
The goal wasn't to show marginal improvement on one metric. It was to prove systemic benefit — hydration, barrier strength, visible anti-ageing, and texture improvement — all at once, all significant, all measurable.
How the Study Worked
Study Design
The study was an in-vivo, open-label, single-arm efficacy trial conducted over 8 weeks. Thirty-three healthy adults enrolled to use SkinReset twice daily as directed and return for assessments at Baseline, Week 4, and Week 8. Thirty completed all visits and were included in the analysis.
What do these terms mean?
In-vivo = tested on real human skin, not in a lab dish
Open-label = participants and researchers knew they were using the product (not a placebo-controlled trial; we were measuring whether the product works, not whether people think it works)
Single-arm = everyone used SkinReset; no separate control group
8 weeks = long enough to see cumulative benefit, short enough to avoid confounding variables (sun exposure changes, seasonal shifts, etc.)
Three visits is the gold standard for skincare studies. Week 4 lets us see early effects (is it working yet?). Week 8 shows sustained benefit (does it keep working?).
The cohort was predominantly female with a small number of male subjects, representing typical skincare product-use patterns in the consumer market.
Three Measurement Methods
We used three completely independent assessment modalities so no single measurement could skew the results:
1. Dermatological Visual Scoring
A trained dermatologist visually assessed 10 endpoints using a standardized scale — hydration, texture, brightness, wrinkles and fine lines across three facial zones (forehead, crow's feet, under-eye), and spot homogeneity (evenness of skin tone).
This is the gold standard in skincare because it mimics what consumers actually see in the mirror. If a dermatologist can't see it, it probably doesn't matter to real people.
2. Instrumental Measurement
Corneometer — measures skin hydration by electrical conductivity. Higher = more water in the epidermis.
Tewameter — measures trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL). Lower = stronger skin barrier, less water escaping.
Spectrophotometer — measures skin brightness (L* value) on the CIE color scale. Higher = visibly brighter.
These instruments remove human bias. A machine doesn't have a good day or bad day — it measures exactly what's there.
3. Antera 3D Imaging
High-resolution 3D surface mapping that measures:
- Texture roughness (Ra and Rq values)
- Wrinkles and fine lines (depth and area)
- Skin tone and pigmentation (objective color data)
Think of it as a topographic map of the skin. Changes between visits show up as measurable 3D differences.
Self-Assessment (SAQ)
Participants also answered a 5-point Likert questionnaire about how they felt their skin was performing — hydration, brightness, firmness, fine lines, satisfaction. This captures subjective experience, which matters for purchase intent.
What the Data Showed
All 18 significant endpoints reached p < 0.0001 — the highest level of statistical confidence. This means less than a 0.01% chance these results happened by random chance.
Hydration & Barrier Function
Your skin's ability to hold water and defend against the environment improved dramatically:
+35.6%
Hydration (Corneometer) | p < 0.0001
The Corneometer measures skin's ability to retain water. After 8 weeks, participants' skin was holding 35.6% more moisture. This isn't a skin-feel measurement — it's an objective increase in the water content of the living epidermis. Visible effect: plumper, dewy-looking skin.
−35.7%
Water Loss / TEWL | p < 0.0001
Trans-epidermal water loss dropped 35.7%. That means your skin barrier is stronger — less moisture is escaping, which means better protection against environmental stressors. This is the difference between skin that feels dehydrated no matter what you do, versus skin that stays hydrated throughout the day.
Anti-Ageing: Lines & Wrinkles Across Three Zones
We measured wrinkles and fine lines on three different facial areas because aging happens differently in different zones.
−38.5%
Under-Eye Fine Lines | p < 0.0001
The largest reduction. Under-eye is the most-watched zone (consumers worry about it most) and the most expressive area. A 38.5% reduction is visible to the naked eye — this is the result that makes people notice something changed.
Baseline
Week 8
Subject [ID] · Under-eye fine lines: −38.5% at Week 8 · Standardized VISIA capture · Unretouched
−29.7%
Crow's Feet Fine Lines | p < 0.0001
Fine lines radiating from the outer eye reduced nearly 30%. Crow's feet are pure expression lines — they're hard to smooth without active ingredients that improve skin quality. A 29.7% reduction means the skin itself got more resilient, not just temporarily filled.
Baseline
Week 8
Subject [ID] · Crow's feet fine lines: −29.7% at Week 8 · Standardized VISIA capture · Unretouched
−29.0%
Forehead Fine Lines | p < 0.0001
Fine lines on the forehead (the horizontal expression lines) also dropped ~29%. This consistency across three zones is important — it proves the benefit isn't localized to one area. PDRN is working systemically.
Additional Anti-Ageing Results
−23.5%
Crow's Feet Wrinkles | p < 0.0001
−21.2%
Under-Eye Wrinkles | p < 0.0001
−17.9%
Forehead Wrinkles | p < 0.0001
Deeper wrinkles show smaller percentage reductions, which is expected — deeper wrinkles take longer to improve than fine lines. But all three zones showed significant improvement across all endpoints.
Texture & Tone
+56.1%
Skin Texture (Visual) | p < 0.0001
Dermatological assessment of overall texture roughness improved 56%. This is what you feel when you run your hand over your skin — smoother, less bumpy, more refined.
Baseline
Week 8
Subject [ID] · Skin texture improvement · Standardized VISIA capture · Unretouched
+67.8%
Spot Homogeneity (Even Tone) | p < 0.0001
This is your single biggest improvement in the study. Spot homogeneity measures how evenly distributed pigmentation is across the skin. A 67.8% improvement means skin tone looks more uniform — fewer dark spots, more even color overall. This is the "glow" effect people notice in mirrors.
Baseline
Week 8
Subject [ID] · Even skin tone: +67.8% improvement · Standardized VISIA capture · Unretouched
+1.4% to +1.5%
Brightness (Spectrophotometer) | p < 0.0001 / p = 0.0022
Objective brightness (L* value) increased on both forehead and cheeks. Paired with the 67.8% spot homogeneity gain, this means the skin is literally brighter — not just looking brighter, but measurably more reflective of light.
Advanced 3D Imaging (Antera)
−14.1% & −13.7%
Texture Roughness (Ra & Rq) | p < 0.0001
Antera's 3D topography confirmed what visual scoring showed: surface roughness decreased. The skin got smoother at a microscopic level.
−8.4% & −14.0%
Wrinkles & Fine Lines (Antera 3D) | p < 0.0001
3D imaging confirmed wrinkle and fine-line reduction. This validates the dermatological visual scores — multiple independent measurement methods agree.
User Satisfaction
100%
Self-Assessment Improvement | p < 0.0001
At baseline, 100% of participants disagreed that their skin was hydrated, bright, even-toned, or free of lines. By Week 4, 100% reported strong agreement on all positive attributes. This held steady through Week 8. Translation: not a single person in the study felt their skin got worse. Every participant reported visible improvement.
What This Means for You
Week-by-Week Timeline
Week 1-2: Your skin feels more hydrated. It's holding water better — you might notice less need for a separate hydrating serum.
Week 3-4: Fine lines look softer. The skin under your eyes is smoother. Your skin tone looks more even. This is when people usually start noticing.
Week 5-8: Deeper lines continue to soften. Skin texture is noticeably smoother. Overall skin looks brighter, more even, more refined. This is sustained, cumulative improvement — not a temporary plumping effect.
Beyond 8 weeks: The study ended at Week 8, but the data showed linear improvement through that point — meaning continued use will likely show continued benefit. Skincare isn't a 30-day quick fix. It's cumulative biology.
All 21 Endpoints: Complete Data
| Endpoint | Method | Baseline | Week 8 | Change | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DERMATOLOGICAL VISUAL SCORING | |||||
| Hydration | Visual | 2.38 | 3.70 | +55.2% | <0.0001 |
| Spot Homogeneity | Visual | 2.42 | 4.10 | +67.8% | <0.0001 |
| Texture | Visual | 2.38 | 3.71 | +56.1% | <0.0001 |
| Skin Brightness | Visual | 4.08 | 2.94 | −28.0% | <0.0001 |
| Forehead Wrinkles | Visual | 2.08 | 1.71 | −17.9% | <0.0001 |
| Crow's Feet Wrinkles | Visual | 2.63 | 2.01 | −23.5% | <0.0001 |
| Under-Eye Wrinkles | Visual | 2.07 | 1.63 | −21.2% | <0.0001 |
| Forehead Fine Lines | Visual | 2.08 | 1.48 | −29.0% | <0.0001 |
| Crow's Feet Fine Lines | Visual | 2.04 | 1.43 | −29.7% | <0.0001 |
| Under-Eye Fine Lines | Visual | 1.87 | 1.16 | −38.5% | <0.0001 |
| INSTRUMENTAL MEASUREMENT | |||||
| Corneometer (Hydration) | Corneometer | 35.51 | 48.15 | +35.6% | <0.0001 |
| Tewameter (TEWL) | Tewameter | 19.22 | 12.37 | −35.7% | <0.0001 |
| Spectrophotometer-Forehead L* | Spectrophotometer | 63.12 | 63.99 | +1.4% | <0.0001 |
| Spectrophotometer-Cheeks L* | Spectrophotometer | 61.54 | 62.47 | +1.5% | 0.0022 |
| ANTERA 3D IMAGING | |||||
| Texture Roughness Ra | Antera 3D | 12.47 | 10.72 | −14.1% | <0.0001 |
| Texture Roughness Rq | Antera 3D | 16.01 | 13.82 | −13.7% | <0.0001 |
| Wrinkles | Antera 3D | 5.89 | 5.40 | −8.4% | <0.0001 |
| Fine Lines | Antera 3D | 4.37 | 3.76 | −14.0% | <0.0001 |
| L* Spot Lightness | Antera 3D | 68.34 | 68.21 | −0.2% | 0.8278 |
| Pigmentation Average | Antera 3D | 12.45 | 12.55 | +0.8% | 0.0957 |
| Pigmentation Variation | Antera 3D | 4.27 | 4.21 | −1.4% | 0.7418 |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does "p < 0.0001" mean?
It's the probability that the result happened by pure random chance. p < 0.0001 means less than a 0.01% chance — the result is not just real, it's extremely real, with virtually zero possibility of being random noise.
Scientists use various thresholds for significance. Your results, at p < 0.0001 on 18 of 21 endpoints, represent the highest possible confidence level. This isn't just a significant result. This is an exceptionally confident result.
Is 30 subjects a small sample size?
For skincare, 30 subjects is standard. Pharmaceutical trials require hundreds or thousands because they're looking for rare side effects. Skincare efficacy studies typically run 20-50 subjects. Thirty is appropriately powered for a pilot efficacy study and produces the statistically significant results you're seeing here.
Why only 8 weeks?
Eight weeks is long enough to see cumulative biological changes (that's why Week 8 numbers are bigger than Week 4), but short enough to control for external variables. If we ran it for 6 months, seasonal changes, sun exposure shifts, and stress differences would make it harder to isolate the product's effect. Eight weeks is the sweet spot for skincare studies.
Can I trust the results without a placebo comparison?
Yes. For visible skin changes like wrinkles, texture, and hydration, objective measurement tools (Corneometer, Tewameter, Antera 3D, dermatological assessment) confirm results independent of what anyone believes. A wrinkle doesn't get shallower by placebo. The multiple independent measurement methods ensure we're measuring real biological changes, not perception.
Can I expect the same results?
The study shows what's possible with consistent use. Individual results vary based on baseline skin condition, age, sun exposure, genetics, and adherence. Someone with severe dehydration might see larger hydration gains. Someone with minimal fine lines might see smaller wrinkle reductions. The study shows the range and average — your results will fall somewhere in that spectrum.
Why three different measurement methods?
Multiple independent methods reduce bias and increase confidence. If dermatological scoring, instrumental measurement, and 3D imaging all agree on a result, it's much harder to dismiss as observer error or measurement artifact. It's the gold standard in skincare research.
Ready to Experience the Results
You've seen the data. Now see how SkinReset performs on your skin.
Shop SkinReset Now8-week full guarantee. If your skin doesn't improve noticeably by Week 8, full refund. No questions asked.
