Dermatology in Student-Run Clinics in the United States: Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Student-run clinics (SRCs) for dermatology hold potential to significantly advance skin-related health equity, and a comprehensive analysis of these clinics may inform strategies for optimizing program effectiveness. Objective: We aimed to perform a scoping review of the literature about dermatology SRCs across the United States. Methods: We conducted systematic literature searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and Scopus on March 1, 2023, and June 19, 2024. No date, language, or paper-type restrictions were included in the search strategy. A total of 229 references were uploaded to Covidence for screening by 2 independent reviewers (SK and LL), and 23 full-text documents were assessed for eligibility. After an additional 8 documents were identified through a gray literature search, a total of 31 studies were included in the final analysis. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) studies set in an SRC, which was operationally led by medical students and could render condition-relevant treatments to patients, with dermatology care; (2) published in English; (3) within the United States; (4) included characterization of any of the following: logistics, care, patients, or design; and (5) included all study or document types, including gray literature that was not peer reviewed (eg, conference abstracts, preprints, and letters to the editor). Exclusion criteria were (1) papers not published in English and (2) those with duplicated data or that were limited in scope or not generalizable. Data were extracted qualitatively using Microsoft Excel to categorize the studies by several domains, including clinic location, demographics, services offered, and barriers to care. Results: There are at least 19 dermatology SRCs across the United States. The most common conditions encountered included atopic dermatitis; acne; fungal infections; benign nevi; psoriasis; and neoplasms, such as basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and melanoma. Key facilitators for the clinics included faculty oversight, attending physician participation for biopsy histopathology, and dedicated program coordinators. Major barriers included lack of follow-up, medication nonadherence, and patient no-shows. Conclusions: Dermatology SRCs serve a diverse patient population, many of whom are underrepresented in traditional dermatology settings. This scoping review provides insights to help build stronger program foundations that better address community dermatologic health needs.
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 | 0,023 | 0,115 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,025 | 0,030 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
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 ».