MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328258722 · doi:10.1097/der.0b013e31824a6373

Scalp “Sensitivity” Without Visible Lesions

2012· article· en· W2328258722 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrew P. Word, Travis Vandergriff, Ponciano D. Cruz

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDermatologyScalpItchingHistopathologyContact dermatitisSeborrheic dermatitisAllergyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PRECÍS We present a case of “pruritus” of the scalp without visible lesions that was unresponsive to conventional treatment modalities. DISCUSSION A 63-year-old man presented with a 4-year history of itching restricted to the scalp. Clobetasol 0.05% solution was the only effective medical intervention, although this gave him relief for no more than 1 hour after application. The patient stated that the application of rubbing alcohol to affected areas was the only other effective temporary treatment. Physical examination and histopathology revealed no specific abnormalities. Patch testing to 46 standard allergens was negative. Treatment with topical corticosteroids, oral antihistamines, antibiotics, and neuromodulatory medications failed to alleviate the “pruritus.” Most patients who complain of itching of the scalp present with visible lesions or dermatoses, from which a clinical or histological diagnosis can usually be made. Common causes of such scalp dermatoses include seborrheic dermatitis, contact dermatitis, psoriasis, dermatomyositis, and pediculosis. By contrast, patients with “pruritus” of the scalp without visible lesions also commonly present for relief of symptoms. A literature search of PubMed and Ovid databases led us to use “sensitivity” instead of just “pruritus” as the most encompassing terminology of symptoms from patients’ perspectives. The pathophysiology of skin sensitivity without visible lesions is poorly understood with an apparent reduced “tolerance threshold” of skin for itch but without specific immune or allergic reaction present and histopathology limited (if at all) to vasodilation or some subtle inflammatory response.1 Often noted, however, is increased transepidermal water loss that may allow greater entry of irritants through the skin.1 In contrast to other body areas, histamine may not be a mediator of itching on the scalp because in vivo analysis revealed decreased vascular and sensory sensitivity to histamine-induced pruritogenesis on the scalp as compared with the forearm, which in turn may be due to the scalp having significantly fewer histamine-sensitive chemonocioceptors.2 Central processing of the itch stimulus could also be different, requiring a higher central threshold for itching on the scalp versus the area subserved by the trigeminal nerve.2 Pain may play a role in masking perceptions of itch as well because opioid administration often results counterintuitively in “pruritus” of the scalp.2 Up to 70% of patients with skin sensitivity have a psychiatric illness,3 and it is well known that psychiatric illnesses and psychosomatic factors can elicit “pruritus” and affect perception of scratching behavior.4 Furthermore, the scalp and face are the most common sites of involvement in localized skin sensitivity associated with psychiatric disease.3 Unfortunately, no high-level data exist to guide clinical practice in the treatment of scalp sensitivity. Topical corticosteroids and oral antihistamines often fail to relieve the “pruritus,” perhaps because of the scalp’s different local mediator of itch or different central processing of itch stimulus. More efficacious treatment modalities have been shown to focus on treatment of comorbid psychiatric disorders with use of tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, anxiolytics, and opioid antagonists.2–5 PEARL Our case highlights the difficult challenge of managing scalp sensitivity without visible lesions. Our literature review leads to a recommendation to include psychiatric specialists for consultation and consider use of antidepressant therapy for such cases.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitisSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207