Treatment of face and scalp solar (actinic) keratosis with daylight‐mediated photodynamic therapy is possible throughout the year in <scp>A</scp>ustralia: Evidence from a clinical and meteorological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Solar (actinic) keratosis (AK) is an emergent concern worldwide and is associated with an increased risk of development of non-melanoma skin cancer, especially squamous cell carcinoma. Daylight-mediated photodynamic therapy (DL-PDT) using methyl aminolaevulinate cream has proved to be an effective, nearly painless, and more convenient alternative to conventional PDT for the treatment of AK. In a phase III, randomised, controlled trial performed in Australia, the mean irradiance (light intensity) received by patients during DL-PDT treatment, assessed via a spectroradiometer, was 305 W/m(2) (min. 40 to max. 585 W/m(2) ) with similar efficacy irrespective of intensity or dose. The objective of the present meteorological study was to assess the suitability of natural daylight to perform DL-PDT for the treatment of face and scalp AK during different periods of the year and different geographical locations and latitudes across Australia. METHODS: To determine daylight irradiance during a complete year in eight different geographical locations throughout Australia, we used meteorological software (Meteonorm, Meteotest, Bern, Switzerland), and available solar radiation and weather data from 1986-2005. RESULTS: The average daily irradiance remained within the levels (40-585 W/m(2) ) measured during the clinical DL-PDT study in Australia, throughout the year and in all geographical locations investigated (yearly average from Darwin 548 W/m(2) to Hobart 366 W/m(2) ). CONCLUSIONS: DL-PDT for the treatment of face and scalp AK in Australia can be performed effectively throughout the entire year as long as weather conditions permit daylight exposure and allow participants to remain under direct light for 2 h.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".