Recurrent erysipelas - risk factors and clinical presentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Erysipelas is a common infection that often recurs, but the impact of specific risk factors for reoccurrence remains elusive. In the present study we aimed at clarifying predisposing conditions for reoccurrence. METHODS: Medical records were reviewed from all patients ≥18 years of age diagnosed with erysipelas at the Department of Infectious Diseases at Skåne University Hospital, Sweden, from January 2007 to February 2011. 502 patients were included, of which 357 were single episode erysipelas and 145 had recurrent erysipelas. These two groups were compared regarding underlying conditions and clinical presentation. RESULTS: Erysipelas in the lower limbs had the greatest propensity of recurrence. The associations between underlying conditions and recurrence were largely depending on the site of erysipelas. Overall, the most prominent risk factor for recurrence was lymphedema and other conditions causing a chronic impairment of the defence against microbes. Conditions temporarily disrupting the skin barrier (e.g. a local wound or toe web intertrigo), although likely being risk factors for erysipelas per se, did not seem to predispose to repeated episodes. Individuals with recurrent erysipelas tended to seek medical attention earlier, and were less likely to be hospitalized or receive intravenous antibiotics, but there was no evidence of any difference in inflammatory reaction when taking confounding factors into account. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cross-sectional study of over 500 patients with erysipelas, lymphedema was the most prominent risk factors for recurrence although the distribution of predisposing conditions varies depending on the site of erysipelas.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".