The stakes of consumer and clinical testing have never been higher. With an increasingly discerning consumer audience and a competitive race for true innovation, claims among brands having the data to deliver on one’s promises has never been more imperative. While consumer perception studies help relay product benefits in an easily communicable way and come with the added benefit of a more accessible price point, clinical testing is the gold standard for efficacious and substantiated claims given the rigorous framework within which it operates.
As our industry leans heavier and heavier into substantiation—with a 2023 Accenture report showing that brands with science-led claims gained 2.5 times more venture capital funding than those with natural and sustainable claims—the structures of consumer and clinical testing are evolving. The journey to those outcomes needs to be based on an accurate foundation that reflects the beauty consumer of today: diverse, informed, and with higher expectations than ever before. A Harris Williams study across 1,250 US beauty consumers found 95% expect to spend the same or more on beauty and personal care in 2024, with 91.9% ranking product efficacy, 89.4% functional benefits, and 66.1% clinical and scientific studies as important to their product selection criteria.
“With the continued convergence of the beauty and aesthetics industries, beauty brands are leaning much harder into clinical and professional validation to drive differentiation when marketing to the consumer. The consumer is smarter, better educated, demanding more from their beauty products, and efficacy is the top priority. Brands need to show, not tell, consumers and providers why their product is different,” Sharon Johnson, Chief Operating Officer of Prestige Testing, tells BeautyMatter. Whether it’s clinical trials or consumer studies, a new paradigm of product testing rigor will emerge.
The Case for Consumer Versus Clinical
The sensory panels, focus groups, and self-evaluation surveys in consumer perception studies give tangible feedback and insights for brands. They help spotlight what product qualities stand out and where formulations can be adjusted and improved. Also, for shoppers browsing the aisles, claims from these types of research can be easier to interpret rather than the more industry-led jargon of in vivo and in vitro studies. After all, claims can only be as impressive as they are understandable to your customer.
On the flipside, the demographic and testing parameters of consumer perception studies are often less precise. Factors like age, skin or hair type, and pre-existing product use are often not taken into account, while claims such as improved hydration can have varying interpretations across individuals. Here there is a huge potential for the industry to adopt a more pinpointed and detailed approach.
The controlled setting and monitoring of participants in clinical trials, as well as the precise measurements of results with tools such as image analysis and instrumental testing of skin moisture, exfoliation, and elasticity, mean there is less margin for inaccuracies. Devices like Canfield Reveal Imager produce RBX images that employ red to denote hemoglobin and brown to denote melanin in the skin in order to scan for vascular conditions and sun damage, respectively. Meanwhile, clinical grade image analysis can offer tangible results for a range of parameters across skincare and haircare like wrinkle, fine line, hyperpigmentation reduction, increased sculpting and brightness, and acne lesion reduction. In vitro tests, performed in test tubes and petri dishes rather than living human skin, are more cost and time-effective than in vivo, but testing the product on the consumer directly can highlight potential issues or benefits which may go undetected in non anthropoid settings.
When it comes to clinical validation, a multitiered approach is an investment that pays dividends. Having substantiated and thorough data on multiple fronts, tested on the very customer the product is being designed for, is an invaluable marketing tool. It also helps build consumer trust, claims validity, and brand reputation in the long term. However, no matter how steeped in science the claims are, it is also important for consumers to have a tangible understanding of how to interpret these outcomes, rather than being confused by industry jargon. “By combining testing strategies such as before and after photos, clinical measurements, and consumer feedback, brands can effectively communicate the value of clinical trials to consumers and professional providers, making the science behind products both accessible, appealing, and providing reliable ways for consumers to understand the performance of their products,” Johnson adds.
Dual Benefits of Consumer and Clinical Testing
The technological investments and strict parameters of clinical testing undoubtedly gives brands a competitive edge in claim substantiation. However, consumer perception studies shouldn’t be dismissed as they provide the nuance and more emotional side of product testing, which isn’t accounted for in clinical trials.
“Surveys can capture how products perform in everyday use, beyond controlled clinical settings. While clinical trials provide objective, scientific data, consumer perception surveys offer insights into the subjective experience of using a product. This combination gives a more comprehensive understanding of a product’s performance,” Johnson adds. “Consumer perception surveys will remain a vital tool for understanding and meeting consumer needs. Publishing survey results alongside clinical data provides a transparent view of product efficacy and consumer satisfaction. Consumer survey studies complement the rigorous data from clinical trials to ensure products are both effective and safe to use.”
So, perhaps rather than seeing consumer and clinical data as completely separate entities, brands should focus on the multifaceted demands of the current market, driven by results but also a certain product “it factor” that might not be purely scientific. For example, a skincare SKU could deliver impeccable results but if the product texture, feel, and application process isn’t to a consumer’s liking, this might impact a future repurchase. Credibility is the backbone of any ambitious beauty enterprise, but consumers having a deeper connection with the product—that unique joy of using a holy grail SKU—is something more elusive. This is where having a holistic view of consumer testing comes into play.
Creating New Avenues of Access and Inclusivity
The conditions and framework of both consumer and clinical testing are evolving as the industry and consumers alike become more inquisitive around frameworks like Fitzpatrick skin phototypes, curl types, and age of trial participants. After all, results will vary depending on what genetic background a participant enters with. Increased precision here has impacts even further down the line, offering for a more nuanced and considered product concept and formulation from the onset. The very foundations of the beauty industry, which were built during times with less representation, need to be rebuilt, and product testing needs to reflect the multicultural population of beauty consumers in the present and future.
“Clinical testing is evolving rapidly due to increased consumer demand for transparency and efficacy of products. Trends are moving toward more rigorous and inclusive clinical testing to meet consumer expectations and stand out in a competitive market,” Johnson states. “Brands are expanding their clinical trials to include a wider range of skin types, ages, ethnicities, and genders while also increasing the number of participants in clinical trials to strengthen the validity of the results.” While a majority of industry testing is done on Fitzpatrick Types 2 and 3 (skin that tans minimally and burns easily for Type 2, and skin that tans gradually to light brown and burns moderately), Prestige Testing’s process covers all six types.
For all its benefits, traditionally clinical testing has also come with a set of pain points that have limited access: time, costs (upwards of $30,000 per SKU), a lack of oversight for brand owners, and a reduction in speed to market. Prestige Testing is looking to alleviate those frustrations with the introduction of on-site testing at med spas through decentralized, remote, and portable clinical trials.
By meeting individuals where they are, it’s not only increasing convenience, but also offering broader access to possible participants and the ability to collect continuous data in real-life settings. A recent study by BioPharma Dive and SAS discovered that 65% of biopharma executive respondents are planning to modernize data management for clinical trials. With the beauty industry and pharma increasingly converging in light of biotech innovations and the impetus for innovation from the ground up, this sentiment is likely to ring true across beauty as well. Taking testing out of its contained silo will offer brands the chance to see their SKUs stand against the wilderness of everyday life and all the varying factors that can come with it, but measured using the precise tools to help better track these measurements.
Transparency is another key pillar where the clinical testing of tomorrow will offer new benefits. By lifting the veil on the processes and metrics used, driven by the demand for more participant inclusivity and data substantiation, brand owners will be more front and center of how, when, and with whom their formulas are being put to the test.
One thing is for certain: beauty brands have to invest in claims substantiation more than ever before. But science-backed claims alone won’t suffice; they need to be the result of an in-depth, considered, and above all inclusive testing process that aligns with the core mission of bringing newness to market—ultimately driving ambition and innovation across the industry. As the saying goes, the numbers don’t lie. With a clinical-based approach to product testing, now those numbers will hold even more weight.
