Nomenclature of Cutaneous Vasculitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To prepare a dermatologic addendum to the 2012 revised International Chapel Hill Consensus Conference Nomenclature of Vasculitides (CHCC2012) to address vasculitides affecting the skin (D-CHCC). The goal was to standardize the names and definitions for cutaneous vasculitis. METHODS: A nominal group technique with a facilitator was used to reach consensus on the D-CHCC nomenclature, using multiple face-to-face meetings, e-mail discussions, and teleconferences. RESULTS: Standardized names, definitions, and descriptions were adopted for cutaneous components of systemic vasculitides (e.g., cutaneous IgA vasculitis as a component of systemic IgA vasculitis), skin-limited variants of systemic vasculitides (e.g., skin-limited IgA vasculitis, drug-induced skin-limited antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis), and cutaneous single-organ vasculitides that have no systemic counterparts (e.g., nodular vasculitis). Cutaneous vasculitides that were not included in the CHCC2012 nomenclature were introduced. CONCLUSION: Standardized names and definitions are a prerequisite for developing validated classification and diagnostic criteria for cutaneous vasculitis. Accurate identification of specifically defined variants of systemic and skin-limited vasculitides requires knowledgeable integration of data from clinical, laboratory, and pathologic studies. This proposed nomenclature of vasculitides affecting the skin, the D-CHCC, provides a standard framework both for clinicians and for investigators.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".