Derma E Stem Cell Eye Lifting Treatment
Everything behind the verdicts on this product: the rule that fired for each concern, the three answers and the documents they rest on, every study on the row with the date it was opened, and the versions of the tables that produced them. Nothing here is edited by hand; it is generated from the same records the verdicts are.
The scaleRecommendedGoodSupportingEarly evidenceNot for thisAvoidhow it works
Engine 5.2.0 · rules 0.5.1 · evidence table ev-2026.10-r231 · computed October 13, 2026 · how we decide · the evidence table · the anchors
for Aging
Niacinamide has trial-level evidence for aging but no guideline or regulatory standing yet — promising, short of a recommendation; the other actives here are not yet assessed for it.
The lead active has at least one trial behind it for the concern but no guideline or regulatory standing yet, and is present at a working level. Short of a recommendation.
- Rule
- R9p → Promising. An active with early or mechanistic evidence only; declared at a working strength, or a labelled active or at a plausible but undeclared level; the product’s category job is not a recognised companion to the concern; moderate or strong evidence dots on the carrier’s row.
q1 = plausible · q2 = adequate | plausible · supportive = false · strength = moderate | strong
Why this rule exists: 0.5.0: 'Unproven' beside three filled dots read as one question answered twice with opposite words (7,018 rows). The chip measures standing, the dots measure trial volume; where the row carries at least one RCT or a tier-2 source (moderate dots) and the active is present at a working level, the honest word is Promising. Unproven is reserved for plausible-standing rows with limited or weak evidence, or an under-dosed form. Same rank as Unproven — a bet either way; the dots order them.
Rule R9p decided 4,872 verdicts across the catalog; “Promising” is the verdict on 4,872 of 45,446. The full register. - Carrying active
- Niacinamide
- 1 · Standing
- Plausible — trials support it
- 2 · Form
- Plausible — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
Studied range: 4–5%, from the trials on the row; needs leave-on contact; judge it after about 8 weeks - 3 · Tolerability
- Standard tolerability — photosensitization
Cautions: a photosensitising active — use sun protection. - Evidence dots
- Moderate evidence
Row checked against its sources on July 17, 2026 (evidence table ev-2026.10-r231). - What readers report
- No reviews read yet for this product. Shown beside the verdict; never blended into it.
- Verdict since
- September 5, 2026 (unchanged across rebuilds since then)
The studies and documents on the row
- Topical niacinamide reduces yellowing, wrinkling, red blotchiness, and hyperpigmented spots in aging facial skin — International Journal of Cosmetic Science (Bissett DL et al — The Procter & Gamble Company, Cincinnati) (2004), opened July 16, 2026
- Niacinamide: A B vitamin that improves aging facial skin appearance — Dermatologic Surgery (Bissett DL, Oblong JE, Berge CA — The Procter & Gamble Company, Miami Valley Laboratories) (2005), opened July 16, 2026
- The clinical anti-aging effects of topical kinetin and niacinamide in Asians: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, split-face comparative trial — Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology (National Taiwan University Hospital) (2007), opened July 16, 2026
- Evaluation of anti-wrinkle effects of a novel cosmetic containing niacinamide — Journal of Dermatology (Kinki University School of Medicine, Osaka) (2008), opened July 16, 2026
- A randomized, controlled comparative study of the wrinkle reduction benefits of a cosmetic niacinamide/peptide/retinyl propionate product regimen vs. a prescription 0·02% tretinoin product regimen — British Journal of Dermatology (P&G-funded; 5 P&G employees + 5 paid P&G consultants) (2010), opened July 16, 2026
- Skincare ingredients recommended by cosmetic dermatologists: A Delphi consensus study — Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology — expert Delphi consensus, NOT a graded guideline (2025), opened July 16, 2026
← Back to the verdict All aging products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →
for Dark Circles
Niacinamide has early evidence for dark circles, and hydration of the periorbital area is the recognised companion to treating it — a reasonable supporting choice, short of a recommendation.
Nothing here targets the concern directly, but the product’s job — barrier care, gentle cleansing, photoprotection — is the recognised companion to treating it. Rinse-off products carrying leave-on actives land here too.
- Rule
- R8a → Supporting role. An active with early or mechanistic evidence only; declared at a working strength, or a labelled active or at a plausible but undeclared level; the product’s category job is a recognised companion to treating the concern.
q1 = plausible · q2 = adequate | plausible · supportive = true
Why this rule exists: A plausible-tier active in a category with a supportive job: the sentence names the active instead of saying nothing targets the concern (the AmLactin / CeraVe SA case for keratosis pilaris, where no guideline and single trials leave the keratolytics at early evidence).
Rule R8a decided 1,509 verdicts across the catalog; “Supporting role” is the verdict on 7,796 of 45,446. The full register. - Carrying active
- Niacinamide
- 1 · Standing
- Plausible — trials support it
- 2 · Form
- Plausible — concentration not declared; read from the position in the ingredient list
Studied range: 5%, from the OTC monograph or label; needs leave-on contact; judge it after about 8 weeks - 3 · Tolerability
- Standard tolerability — fragrance load, irritant load
Cautions: fragrance; known irritants. - Evidence dots
- Limited evidence
Row checked against its sources on July 17, 2026 (evidence table ev-2026.10-r231). - What readers report
- No reviews read yet for this product. Shown beside the verdict; never blended into it.
- Verdict since
- September 5, 2026 (unchanged across rebuilds since then)
The studies and documents on the row
- Treatments of Periorbital Hyperpigmentation: A Systematic Review — Dermatologic Surgery (2021), opened July 16, 2026
- A review of the efficacy of popular eye cream ingredients — International Journal of Women's Dermatology (2024), opened July 16, 2026
- Clinical Efficacy of a Novel Topical Formulation on Periorbital Dark Circles: An Objective Analysis — Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology (2025), opened July 16, 2026
← Back to the verdict All dark circles products → Disclose a concentration or correct a fact →
as a eye cream
Does what a eye cream is for: targets a real eye concern, safe for eye skin.
- Rule
- J2 → Does the job. The category-job reading is 65 or more.
Category job score over the measured features 65–85. - Measured from the label
- safe for eye skin, targets a real eye concern
- Not measurable from the label
- hydrates without heaviness, stays where it's put
- Tolerability
- Standard tolerability
Listed for Dehydration, Dullness, with no verdict: the actives here have no evidence row for those concerns yet. That is a gap in our table, not a mark against the product.
- Dehydration: The actives here (Niacinamide, Plant Stem Cells, Caffeine, DMAE) are in the research queue for dehydration; no verdict until their rows are written.
- Dullness: The actives here (Niacinamide, Plant Stem Cells, Caffeine, DMAE) are in the research queue for dullness; no verdict until their rows are written.
- A photosensitising active — use sun protection
- Fragrance
- Known irritants
A verdict is Dermington’s assessment of how well a product’s ingredients fit a concern — never a claim about what the product treats. Every rule is public and the same for every product; a brand cannot buy a reading. How we decide · what has changed · disclaimer.