Assessment of Pruritus Characteristics and Impact on Burn Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this cross-sectional study was to characterize and describe persistent postburn pruritus. Cause and treatment of postburn itch is elusive. It has been suggested that burn survivors with persistent pruritus should be divided into acute itch (≤6 months postinjury) and chronic itch (>6 months postinjury) because the cause of itch may be different. Cross-sectional data of itch characteristics reported here are from the baseline data of a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled pilot study of 23 subjects with frequent and bothersome postburn pruritus. Subjects self-completed validated scales for variables of itch sensation, affect of itch, and severity. Variables of quality of life, frequency, pain and itch intensity, skin condition, scar, and medication were also recorded. Itch frequency revealed that 87% of subjects experienced itching daily, 96% experienced three or more episodes a day, and 52% had episode durations lasting 5 to 30 minutes per incidence. Itch was reported as unbearable by 94% of subjects with chronic itch and by 86% of subjects with acute itch, whereas bothersome was 88 and 100%, respectively. Itch sensation dimension of stinging was 74% in both acute and chronic itch subjects. Crawling and burning sensations were often severe. Potential itch triggers and relief activities were identified. Differences in sensory and affective itch components were detected between acute and chronic itch subjects. Combinations of itch mechanisms probably contribute to the development of and changes in pruritus. Characterizing the sensation and affective itch dimensions in conjunction with inflammation, burn injury, recovery, scar maturation, medication, and psychological status should better elucidate postburn itch.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".