MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W160859945 · doi:10.2310/6620.2010.09103

Stoma Dermatitis: Prevalent but Often Overlooked

2010· article· en· W160859945 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shilpa Agarwal, Alison Ehrlich

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStoma care and complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDermatologyIrritant contact dermatitisContact dermatitisStoma (medicine)EtiologyAllergic contact dermatitisDiaper DermatitisAllergySurgeryPathologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peristomal dermatoses commonly afflict the area around stoma openings in ostomy patients. These complications, however, are often unreported by patients and remain untreated for years, thus affecting maintenance and recovery from the surgery. These dermatoses can have chemical, mechanical, irritant, bacterial, immunologic, or disease-related etiologies. Examples of common forms of dermatitis that occur peristomally include fecal or urine irritant contact dermatitis, chronic papillomatous dermatitis, mechanical dermatitis, and allergic contact dermatitis. This article summarizes various skin irritations that can occur after an ostomy and also reviews previously published reports of peristomal allergic contact dermatitis. In addition, the clinical importance of identifying these dermatoses (most important, their effects on the patient's quality of life), risk factors for the skin irritations, the importance of patch testing, treatment of stoma dermatitis, and the importance of patient education and patient-doctor communication are also discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitisSame topicStoma care and complicationsFrench-language works237,207