MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137260311 · doi:10.2310/7750.2008.06009

Naftifine: A Review

2008· review· en· W2137260311 on OpenAlexaff
Aditya K. Gupta, Jennifer E Ryder, Elizabeth A. Cooper

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNail Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMediprobe Research (Canada)Sunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllylamineMedicineDermatophytePharmacologyDermatologyItchingChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Naftifine is a topical allylamine that is effective and safe in the management of superficial dermatomycoses. Naftifine is fungicidal in vitro against a broad spectrum of dermatophyte fungi and provides good activity against Candida and Aspergillus species. It is also effective against gram-negative and gram-positive bacteria. OBJECTIVE: To provide a review of the pharmacologic properties and clinical efficacy of topical naftifine preparations. METHODS: A review of the medical literature was performed using PubMed (1965-2006) using the search term "naftifine." All available English-language articles discussing the pharmacology and clinical use of naftifine were reviewed for the article. RESULTS: Naftifine causes interruption of fungal ergosterol synthesis and accumulation of squalene in fungal organisms. Naftifine also has demonstrated anti-inflammatory properties such as a reduction in superoxide production and a reduction in polymorphonuclear leukocyte chemotaxis/endothelial adhesion. Naftifine has shown good efficacy and safety for a variety of conditions and is a useful treatment that provides both antifungal action and relief of inflammatory signs and symptoms. Few adverse events have been noted with naftifine use, the most frequent being mild and transient burning, stinging, or itching in the application area. CONCLUSION: Naftifine remains a reliable multifunctional agent for a variety of superficial infections.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and SurgerySame topicNail Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207