MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1628149206 · doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000102

Flexural Eczema Versus Atopic Dermatitis

2015· review· en· W1628149206 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sharon E. Jacob, Alina Goldenberg, Susan Nedorost, Jacob P. Thyssen, Luz Fonacier, Radosław Śpiewak

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtopic dermatitisDermatologyFlexural strengthComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flexural eczema and atopic dermatitis are frequently synonymized. As respiratory atopy is rarely tested for and found in these patients, systematically equating a flexural distribution of dermatitis with atopic dermatitis may too frequently result in misclassified diagnoses and potentially missed opportunity for intervention toward improving patients' symptoms and quality of life. We present a critical review of the available evidence for the atopic dermatitis diagnosis and discuss the similarities between atopic dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis. Because neither flexural predilection nor atopy is specific for atopic dermatitis, we conclude that the term atopic dermatitis is a misnomer and propose an etymologic reclassification of atopic dermatitis to "atopy-related" dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis can induce an atopic dermatitis-like phenotype, and thus, flexural dermatitis cannot be assumed as atopic without further testing. Patch testing should at least be considered in cases of chronic or recurrent eczema regardless of the working diagnosis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitisSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207