Daylight photodynamic therapy for actinic keratosis: an international consensus
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an attractive therapy for non-melanoma skin cancers including actinic keratoses (AKs) because it allows treatment of large areas; it has a high response rate and results in an excellent cosmesis. However, conventional PDT for AKs is associated with inconveniently long clinic visits and discomfort during therapy. In this article, we critically review daylight-mediated PDT, which is a simpler and more tolerable treatment procedure for PDT. We review the effective light dose, efficacy and safety, the need for prior application of sunscreen, and potential clinical scope of daylight-PDT. Three randomized controlled studies have shown that daylight-mediated PDT is an effective treatment of thin AKs. Daylight-mediated PDT is nearly pain-free and more convenient for both the clinics and patients. Daylight-mediated PDT is especially suited for patients with large field-cancerized areas, which can easily be exposed to daylight. Further investigations are necessary to determine at which time of the year and in which weather conditions daylight-mediated PDT will be possible in different geographical locations.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it