Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cutaneous larva migrans (CLM) is the most frequent travel‐associated skin disease of tropical origin. 1,2 This dermatosis first described as CLM by Lee in 1874 was later attributed to the subcutaneous migration of Ancylostoma larvae by White and Dove in 1929. 3,4 Since then, this skin disease has also been called creeping eruption, creeping verminous dermatitis, sand worm eruption, or plumber’s itch, which adds to the confusion. It has been suggested to name this disease hookworm‐related cutaneous larva migrans (HrCLM). 5 Although frequent, this tropical dermatosis is not sufficiently well known by Western physicians, and this can delay diagnosis and effective treatment. Indeed, misdiagnosis or inappropriate treatment affects 22% to 58% of the travelers with CLM. 6–8 In one case report, the time lag between the onset of disease and the diagnosis was 22 months. 9 Five large (>40 patients each) published studies of imported cases of CLM in returning travelers have greatly helped improve knowledge of this disease. 2,6–8,10 This is particularly true as regards its natural history and response to treatment in short‐term travelers without possibility of recontamination.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".