Association of Vitiligo and Alopecia Areata With Atopic Dermatitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Previous studies found conflicting results as to whether atopic dermatitis (AD) is increased in patients with vitiligo and alopecia areata (AA). OBJECTIVE: To compare the prevalence of AD between patients with either vitiligo or AA and those without these disorders by performing a meta-analysis of observational studies. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and a manual search of 12 additional journals between 1946 and April 5, 2014. STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies published in any language that compared the prevalence of AD among patients with and without either vitiligo or AA. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data were extracted by 2 independent investigators. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Methodological Evaluation of Observational Research checklist. A meta-analysis of studies assessing AD, vitiligo, and/or AA was performed using a fixed-effects model to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs). Subset analyses were performed for childhood vs adult-onset vitiligo and alopecia totalis or alopecia universalis vs patchy alopecia. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Self-reported and/or physician-diagnosed AD, vitiligo, and AA. RESULTS: In total, 16 studies of vitiligo and 17 studies of AA were included in the review. In the pooled analysis of the studies that included control patients without vitiligo (n = 2) and control patients without AA (n = 3), patients with vitiligo (Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel OR, 7.82; 95% CI, 3.06-20.00, P < .001) or AA (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 2.25-2.94, P < .001) had significantly higher odds of AD than did control patients without these disorders. Pooled analysis of 3 studies found higher odds of AD in patients with early-onset vitiligo (<12 years) compared with those with late-onset vitiligo (OR, 3.54; 95% CI, 2.24-5.63, P < .001). Pooled analysis of 4 studies found higher odds of AD in patients with alopecia totalis or alopecia universalis compared with those with patchy alopecia (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.48, P = .04). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patients with either vitiligo, especially early-onset disease, or AA, especially alopecia totalis or alopecia universalis, have significantly increased risk for AD.
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 | 0.022 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".