## 7 Results  
An objective evaluation and detailed analysis of eight skin parameters was conducted to assess the efficacy of the More Young cosmetic device before and after treatment compared with the results of using 7D HIFU device. A comprehensive comparison was conducted to conclude the statistical significance of pre and post-treatment results. These results indicate that the device's impact was particularly significant on parameters related to sebum production, skin texture, and wrinkle reduction, which are critical factors in overall skin health and appearance. The mean differences, as well as trends in these parameters, are visually depicted in Figure 14, offering a clear representation of the improvements achieved through the treatment. These findings suggest that the More Young device may provide targeted benefits for specific skin conditions, mainly, wrinkles and pores. The findings illustrate that the \"More Young\" treatment led to statistically significant improvements across all eight skin parameters, as evidenced by the mean differences, t-values, and \(p\)-values (<0.001 *). Notably, wrinkles, textures, pores, and other skin attributes all showed significant changes, with high Cohen's d values reflecting large effect sizes. Specifically, the parameters \"Wrinkles,\" \"Textures,\" and \"Pores\" demonstrated notable improvements with [PERSON]'s d values of 5.447, 4.735, and 5.851, respectively, suggesting that the treatment is highly effective in improving these aspects of skin health. These results support the efficacy of \"More Young\" as an intervention for enhanc  
Figure 13: VISIA screen information. three-month treatment period. The improvements are visually summarized in Figure 15, which clusters skin parameters before and after treatment. Figure 14: Pre and post-treatment with More Young HIFU via VISIA skin analysis. Figure 15: Clustered of skin parameters before and after treatment (More Young). In Table 1, the main key parameters for pre and post-treatment, including wrinkles, texture, spots, UV spots, brown spots, pores, red areas, and porphyrins, showed consistent improvement, with mean differences ranging from \(-2.92\) to \(-7.38\). The 95% confidence intervals for all parameters were entirely negative, reinforcing the reliability of these findings. Also, the effect sizes, represented by Cohen's d values, further highlight the treatment's substantial impact, with values ranging from 1.076 to 5.851. This indicates a likely strong effect across all parameters, particularly for wrinkles and pores, where the magnitude of improvement was most pronounced. In a comparative analysis, Table 2 indicates that participants treated with the \"More Young\" device exhibited significantly better outcomes in comparison to those treated with the \"7D\" device across most skin parameters. The \"More Young\" treatment showed significant improvements in parameters such as wrinkles (t = 6.90, \(p<0.001\), [PERSON]'s d = 0.976), textures (t = 19.79, \(p<0.001\), [PERSON]'s d = 2.799), pores (t = 7.89, \(p<0.001\), [PERSON]'s d = 1.115), and porphyrins (t = 5.87, \(p<0.001\), [PERSON]'s d = 0.83). For the \"spots\" parameter, although the mean difference favored the More Young treatment, the result did not reach statistical significance (\(p=0.057\)) and should, therefore, be interpreted with caution. Nevertheless, statistically significant differences were observed in other parameters, including UV spots (\(p=0.043\)), brown spots (\(p=0.009\)), and red areas (\(p=0.007\)), indicating a consistent pattern of superior skin health outcomes associated with the More Young treatment.