Commentary on Epidemiology of mental health comorbidity in patients with atopic dermatitis: An analysis of global trends from 1998 to 2022
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Individuals with atopic dermatitis describe living with a disease which impacts on much more than just the skin. A massive 98% of people living with skin disease1 relate the psycho-social co-morbidities of living with their cutaneous disease. In addition, it works both ways. The skin disease leads to psychological distress and psychological distress initiates or propagates skin disease in a genetically predisposed individual. In this issue, Xiao-ce Cai2 reports the epidemiology of mental health comorbidity in patients with atopic dermatitis: an analysis of global trends from 1998 to 2022 in an extensive meta-analysis by assessing the prevalence of Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), anxiety, depression and suicidality in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) in seven electronic databases from their inception to date. The analysis used the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) tools to assess the quality of observational studies and checked the statistical significance of reported outcomes using contemporaneous software. The issue of the psycho-social co-morbidities of living with AD is relevant for four major reasons. Firstly, the incidence of AD is thought to be increasing globally, and the reasons for this increase remain poorly understood. Secondly, the impact of the psycho-social co-morbidities of AD on the patient and their family and loved ones is huge. Thirdly, the epidemiology of the psycho-social co-morbidities of AD has been studied in many diverse nations, regions, and continents,3 but this is the first attempt to assess the global impact of the psycho-social co-morbidities on individuals with AD. Finally, AD affects adults and children (<18 years of age) differently in terms of the prevalence of the disease, the physical disease itself, and the psychological impact of the disease. It is especially interesting that Cai et al.'s study explores the different literature reporting the psycho-social co-morbidities of living with AD for both adults and children (aged <18 years). This study, which identified 775 studies of which 43 were fully subject to meta-analysis, and which is published in the JEADV, indicates that the global prevalence rates of ADHD, depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation in all patients with AD were 7%, 17%, 21%, and 13%, respectively, between 1998 and October 2022. Among children (aged <18 years), North American children with AD had the highest prevalence rates of ADHD (10%), depression (13%) and anxiety (20%). Among the adult (aged ≥18 years) patients with AD Africa had the highest prevalence rates of depression (36%) and anxiety (44%), while Asian adults with AD had the highest 78 prevalence rates of ADHD (7%) and suicidal ideation (20%). It is clear, then, that globally the psycho-social co-morbidities of anxiety, depression, suicidality, and (possibly) ADHD are more common in patients of all ages with AD. The reasons for the regional variations are speculative, for example, regional conflict, war, culture, and reporting artefact are all possible contributory factors. The authors of the paper are not able to draw conclusions about the global psycho-social co-morbidity variations. But the report matters clinically as dermatology healthcare professionals (HCPs), even more than ever, should recognize these psycho-social co-morbidities, and where possible commence treatment or signpost to appropriate psychodermatology services. It also supports work from organizations such as the European Society for Dermatology and Psychiatry (ESDaP) and the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) psychodermatology task force, both of which have advocated the need for psychodermatology services to be available at least regionally across the globe.4 Currently, this is certainly not the case. Finally, the authors allude to the growing body of evidence, which was discussed in many of the papers subject to their meta-analysis, for neuro-inflammatory processes in the elicitation of the psycho-social co-morbidities of living with AD. This matters because it shifts the focus of the psycho-social co-morbidities from the patient to the disease itself. Prof Bewley has ad hoc consultancy/travel/lecturing agreements with AbbVie, Almirall, BMS, Galderma, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Leo-Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, UCB. Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,092 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,008 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,021 | 0,019 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,004 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».