Psoriatic Nail Disease: Quality of Life and Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nail psoriasis is common among patients with plaque psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis and has a detrimental effect on quality of life. However, there are currently no standardized therapeutic regimens for nail psoriasis. Traditional treatments for nail psoriasis, which include topical, intralesional, and oral therapies, may be time-consuming, painful, or unsafe when administered long term. Biologic therapies have demonstrated efficacy for plaque psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis; these therapies may be particularly promising for the treatment of nail psoriasis as both groups of patients have an elevated incidence of nail dystrophy. The biologic therapies adalimumab, alefacept, efalizumab, etanercept, and infliximab have demonstrated clinically important nail psoriasis improvements using the Nail Psoriasis Severity Index, a helpful tool that, upon validation, will allow comparison across treatments and trials. Large-scale, long-term trials using standardized outcome measures are needed to further evaluate biologic therapies for the treatment of nail psoriasis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".