Comorbidity of rosacea and depression: an analysis of the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Care Survey-Outpatient Department data collected by the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics from 1995 to 2002
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychogenic factors have been considered to be important in the exacerbation and possibly the onset of rosacea. However, there are very few studies that have reported conclusive findings. OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between rosacea and major depressive disease, a common and usually treatable psychiatric disorder. METHODS: Data from 1995 to 2002, collected by the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and the outpatient component of the National Hospital Ambulatory Care Survey, which are both nationally representative surveys of healthcare visits in the U.S.A., were studied. The basic sampling unit in both surveys is the patient visit or encounter. A "Rosacea" variable was created by grouping all rosacea (ICD-9-CM code 695.3) visits and a "Depression" variable was created by grouping the patient visits related to major depressive disorder (ICD-9-CM codes 296.2, 296.3 and 311). As alcohol abuse has been implicated in rosacea, and alcohol can confound symptoms of depression, an "Alcohol" variable was created by grouping all ICD-9-CM codes related to alcohol dependence and abuse (codes 303, 303.0, 303.9 and 305.0). All analyses were conducted using the Complex Samples module of SPSS version 13, to account for the multistage probability sampling design used to collect the data. RESULTS: The weighted data were representative of over 608 million dermatology visits between 1995 and 2002. Logistic regression analysis using "Rosacea" as the dependent variable and age, sex, "Alcohol" and "Depression" as independent variables revealed that the odds ratio for depressive disease in the rosacea group was 4.81 (95% confidence interval 1.39-16.62). The association between "Alcohol" and "Rosacea" was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The comorbidity between major depressive disease and rosacea may have important clinical implications. Alcohol abuse does not appear to play a significant role in this association.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".