Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most onychomycosis infections result from dermatophyte organisms and present as distal lateral subungual onychomycosis (DLSO). Mild to moderate infections may be effectively treated with topical lacquer medications; however, there is no general consensus on what constitutes mild infection. In general, mild infections involve relatively small areas of the nail plate without infection of the nail matrix or lunula. Characteristics such as nail thickness, the number of nails affected, and the degree of onycholysis will also be taken into account in the categorization of nail severity and may increase the severity to moderate or severe even where nail plate area involvement is low. Similarly, although an infection may be mild, for patients with underlying health issues such as diabetes or immunodeficiency, oral therapy may be recommended as it typically provides the higher treatment efficacy required by these conditions. Severe infections may be treated with oral antifungal agents or combinations of oral agents and oral antifungals or oral and topical lacquer antifungals. Débridement is a technique that may be used in nearly any degree of infection to aid treatment efficacy by reducing the burden of fungal infection. Other treatment issues discussed include superficial white onychomycosis, nondermatophyte mold infection, and infection prophylaxis. Treatment is discussed considering a dermatophyte infection of DLSO presentation, unless otherwise stated. Infections should be confirmed by laboratory culture to eliminate any other diagnosis. Therapy recommendations concentrate on those agents approved in Canada for onychomycosis: oral terbinafine, oral itraconazole, and ciclopirox 8% nail lacquer.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.123 | 0.045 |
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".