Griseofulvin and Fluconazole Reduce Transmission of Tinea Capitis in Schoolchildren
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the efficacy of griseofulvin and fluconazole in reducing the potential for person-to-person transmission of tinea capitis (TC) in children. METHODS: Children with TC with positive fungal cultures were treated with griseofulvin 25 mg/kg/day (group A) or fluconazole 6 mg/kg/day (group B) for at least 21 days and up to 12 weeks until cure was achieved. Clinical and mycologic examinations occurred before treatment and on days 3, 7, 10, 14, and 21 of treatment. During each visit, mycologic examination was performed from scalp lesions of children and fingertips of medical staff and parents after a brief touch of the patient's scalp lesions. RESULTS: Ninety patients were enrolled: 48 treated with griseofulvin and 42 with fluconazole. The predominant species were Trichophyton violaceum (n = 44) and Microsporum canis (n = 41), followed by Trichophyton mentagrophytes (n = 3) and Trichophyton rubrum (n = 2). Ten days after treatment more than 75% of patients from both treatment groups were noncontagious. At day 21, all patients from group A were noncontagious and two (7%) with positive culture of M. canis from group B were still contagious. CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences were found between treatment groups. Griseofulvin and fluconazole reduced the potential for disease transmission in children with TC, with griseofulvin being more effective for M. canis infections, although children with TC may be potentially contagious even after up to 3 weeks of treatment. These data should be considered regarding school attendance of children with TC.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".