New Aspects of Itch Pathophysiology: Component Analysis of Atopic Itch Using the ‘Eppendorf Itch Questionnaire’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Itch represents a leading symptom in dermatological practice with many psychophysiological aspects. Instruments for qualitative registration of these central nervous factors and evaluation of therapeutic measures are still missing. We analyzed in detail the subjective itch sensation in 108 patients with acute atopic eczema with a new questionnaire developed in analogy to the McGill pain questionnaire. The descriptors with the highest load in atopic itch and the most frequent reaction patterns in atopic eczema patients were identified. Itch intensity (mean VAS 62%) and eczema severity (SCORAD mean 41 points) showed a different frequency distribution pattern with a correlation of r = 0.33 (p < 0.05). Principal component analysis of the itch questionnaire data was performed and compared with the standardized SCORAD severity index for the patients with atopic eczema. Three main factors of atopic itch explained 58% of the total variance: (1) 'suffering' (correlation with SCORAD, r = 0.6); (2) 'phasic intensity' (correlation with SCORAD, r = 0.4), and (3) 'ecstatic' component (associated with certain active reaction patterns). In conclusion, the complete description of itch has to consider different factors, which may be described on a more general level by three main components. Two of these are correlated with objective criteria of disease activity.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".