MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520096143 · doi:10.1177/1203475416670364

Review of Systemic Treatment Options for Adult Atopic Dermatitis

2016· review· en· W2520096143 on OpenAlexaff
Melinda Gooderham, Charles Lynde, Kim Papp, Marc Bourcier, Lyn Guenther, Wayne Gulliver, Chih-ho Hong, Yves Poulin, Gordon L. Sussman, Ronald Vender

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsDermatrials ResearchUniversité LavalUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of TorontoMemorial University of NewfoundlandProbity Medical Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSystemic therapyAtopic dermatitisIntensive care medicineQuality of life (healthcare)DiseaseDermatologySystemic diseaseInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, pruritic inflammatory skin disease resulting from defects in skin barrier and aberrant immune responses. AD significantly affects the quality of life. Not all patients respond to topical therapies, and often systemic therapy is required to control the disease. OBJECTIVE: To review the treatment options for adult AD patients including those options for patients who do not respond adequately or have contraindications to oral systemic therapy. METHODS: A working group of clinicians with experience managing AD was convened to review the current literature on treatment options for adult AD patients. This review is based on the best available evidence from a published systematic review and an additional literature search. RESULTS: Current treatments for AD are reviewed, including options for adult AD patients who do not respond or have contraindications to current systemic therapies. A new approach with targeted therapies is reviewed based on best available evidence. CONCLUSION: Many AD patients respond satisfactorily to topical or systemic treatments, but for those patients who do not respond or have contraindications, new biologic agents appear to be promising therapies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations46
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and SurgerySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207