Wells syndrome (eosinophilic cellulitis): Proposed diagnostic criteria and a literature review of the drug-induced variant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Wells syndrome is an uncommon inflammatory dermatosis first described in 1971 by Wells. The clinical eruption is characterized by varying morphology and severity and usually follows a relapsing remitting course. The majority of the reported cases are of unknown etiology, drug induced Wells syndrome has rarely been reported. A literature search using MEDLINE was performed. We recorded the features of our case and of the additional cases of drug induced Wells syndrome in the literature. MAIN OBSERVATIONS: Including our case there are 25 cases of drug-induced Wells syndrome reported. Causative drugs include antibiotics, anticholinergic agents, anaesthetics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents, thyroid medications, chemotherapeutic agents, thiomersal containing vaccinations, anti-tumor necrosis factor agents and thiazide diuretics. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors knowledge this is the first reported case of drug-induced Wells syndrome from thiazide diuretics. The diagnosis of Wells syndrome is often controversial and we propose a set of diagnostic criteria.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".