Clinical characteristics of pruritus in chronic idiopathic urticaria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although pruritus is a predominant symptom of chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) its clinical characteristics have not been explored. OBJECTIVES: To characterize the clinical pattern and sensory and affective dimensions of the itch experience, utilizing a comprehensive itch questionnaire. METHODS: A structured questionnaire based on the McGill pain questionnaire was used in 100 patients suffering from CIU randomly recruited from a tertiary referral centre. RESULTS: All 100 patients recruited with CIU completed the questionnaire. In 68 patients pruritus appeared on a daily basis. Most patients experienced their pruritus at night and in the evening (n = 83), and 62 reported difficulty in falling asleep. Pruritus involved all body areas, but mostly the arms (n = 86), back (n = 78) and legs (n = 75). Accompanying symptoms were a sensation of heat in 45 patients and sweating in 15. Most patients (n = 98) were prescribed antihistamines (mainly sedating), of whom 34 experienced long-term relief. The sensation of itch was reported to be stinging (n = 27), tickling (n = 25) and burning (n = 23). Seventy-six patients found their pruritus bothersome, 66 annoying and 14 complained of depression. The itch intensity at its peak was more than double that felt after a mosquito bite. The worst itch scores of those who felt depressed were significantly higher than of those who did not (P = 0.018). There was a positive correlation between the sensory and affective scores during worst itch (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the itch experienced in CIU, highlighting sensory and affective dimensions. The itch questionnaire was found to be a valuable tool for evaluating pruritus in CIU and its unique features.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".