MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259104249 · doi:10.2310/7750.2013.13078

Treatment of Nail Psoriasis with Intralesional Triamcinolone Acetonide Using a Needle-Free Jet Injector: A Prospective Trial

2014· article· en· W2259104249 on OpenAlexaff
Mélissa Nantel-Battista, Vincent Richer, Isabelle Marcil, Antranik Benohanian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNail Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsMedicineTriamcinolone acetonidePsoriasisDermatologyNail (fastener)Surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Treating nail psoriasis is challenging. Corticosteroid matrix injection with needle is a conventional treatment but pain is often a limitation. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate efficacy and safety of triamcinolone acetonide needle-free injection with the Med-Jet MBX in psoriatic fingernail. METHODS: Seventeen patients were enrolled between January 2012 and January 2013. Four treatments sessions were scheduled every 4 ± 1 weeks. Clinical efficacy was evaluated according to Nail Psoriasis Severity Index (NAPSI) score of target nail differences before and after the treatment. RESULTS: Mean baseline NAPSI score was 6.5 on an 8-point scale (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.652-7.348) and mean final NAPSI score was 2.8 on an 8-point scale (95% CI 1.859-3.741), demonstrating statistically significant treatment efficacy (p = .0007). NAPSI score for target nail from baseline to end of treatment was decreased by 46.25%. CONCLUSION: Treatment with triamcinolone acetonide delivered by Med-Jet MBX is a safe, minimally painful and effective treatment for 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations42
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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