Attitudes of Female Patients Regarding Oral Contraceptives for Treatment of Acne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Two hormonal agents with contraceptive properties are currently indicated in Canada for treatment of acne. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the attitudes and concerns of female patients regarding the use of hormonal agents and oral contraceptives in treatment of acne. METHODS: A self-completed questionnaire was administered to all female acne patients of a community-based dermatologist over a 10-week period between June and August 1999. Statistical analysis was performed by chi-square testing at the 5% significance level. RESULTS: Eighty-six percent recognized that oral contraceptives ("birth control pills") were also used as a treatment for acne and 60% were willing to use this form of treatment. The most common concern regarding the use of oral contraceptives were side effects (80%). Younger patients were seven times more likely to be concerned about potential disapproval or misunderstanding on the part of others regarding the use of these medications (p approximately 0.01). CONCLUSION: Female acne patients recognize that oral contraceptives are useful in treatment of acne. Although side effects of these medications are of general concern, social disapproval is of particular concern to younger patients.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".