The Natural History of Chronic Actinic Dermatitis: An Analysis at a Single Institution in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic actinic dermatitis is a photosensitivity disorder with scant epidemiologic data. Case series in Europe have previously shown that improvement or resolution of chronic actinic dermatitis occurs over time in most patients. However, the natural history of chronic actinic dermatitis in patients in the United States has not been studied. OBJECTIVE: To study the natural history of chronic actinic dermatitis in patients in the United States. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review and telephone questionnaire after a 3- to 19-year follow-up period. RESULTS: Of 20 patients with chronic actinic dermatitis, 7 patients (35%) experienced resolution and an additional 11 patients (55%) experienced improvement of their photosensitivity to sunlight during the follow-up period. The proportion of patients experiencing improvement or resolution of their chronic actinic dermatitis increased at 5, 10, and 15 years after diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that abnormal photosensitivity to sunlight in chronic actinic dermatitis improves or resolves over time in most patients in New York. The rates of improvement or resolution in our patients in New York are similar to the rates in case series in Europe despite likely patient demographic differences.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".