Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To provide primary care clinicians with an up-to-date and practical overview of the diagnosis and management of psoriasis. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and observational studies about the diagnosis and management of psoriasis. MAIN MESSAGE: Psoriasis is a chronic, multisystem inflammatory disease with predominantly skin and joint involvement. Beyond the physical dimensions of disease, psoriasis has an extensive emotional and psychosocial effect on patients, affecting social functioning and interpersonal relationships. As a disease of systemic inflammation, psoriasis is associated with multiple comorbidities, including cardiovascular disease and malignancy. The diagnosis is primarily clinical and a skin biopsy is seldom required. Depending on the severity of disease, appropriate treatment can be initiated. For mild to moderate disease, first-line treatment involves topical therapies including corticosteroids, vitamin D3 analogues, and combination products. These topical treatments are efficacious and can be safely initiated and prescribed by primary care physicians. Patients with more severe and refractory symptoms might require further evaluation by a dermatologist for systemic therapy. CONCLUSION: Many patients with psoriasis seek initial evaluation and treatment from their primary care providers. Recognition of psoriasis, as well as its associated medical and psychiatric comorbidities, would facilitate timely diagnosis and appropriate management with effective and safe topical therapies and other medical and psychological interventions, as needed. More severe and refractory cases might warrant referral to a dermatologist for further evaluation and possible systemic therapy.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".