MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900872672 · doi:10.1177/1203475418803627

Approach to the Assessment and Management of Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: A Consensus Document

2018· article· en· W2900872672 on OpenAlexaffabout
Melinda Gooderham, Chih-ho Hong, Lorne Albrecht, Robert Bissonnette, Gurbir Dhadwal, Robert Gniadecki, Parbeer Grewal, Mark G. Kirchhof, Ian Landells, Perla Lansang, C. Lynde, Kim Papp, Yves Poulin, Gordon L. Sussman, Irina Turchin, Marni Wiseman, Jensen Yeung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalCentre de Recherche Dermatologique du Québec MétropolitainLynde Centre for DermatologyOttawa HospitalHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science CentreNexus Clinical Research (Canada)Bellus Health (Canada)University of OttawaUniversity of AlbertaSKiN HealthProbity Medical ResearchInnovaderm (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtopic dermatitisDermatologyMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND:: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic, relapsing, and remitting inflammatory skin disease with complex pathophysiology, primarily driven by type 2 inflammation. Existing guidelines often do not reflect all current therapeutic options and guidance on the practical management of patients with AD is lacking. OBJECTIVES:: To develop practical, up-to-date guidance on the assessment and management of adult patients with AD. METHODS:: An expert panel of 17 Canadian experts, including 16 dermatologists and 1 allergist, with extensive clinical experience managing moderate-to-severe AD reviewed the available literature from the past 5 years using a defined list of key search terms. This literature, along with clinical expertise and opinion, was used to draft concise, clinically relevant reviews of the current literature. Based on these reviews, experts developed and voted on recommendations and statements to reflect the practical management of adult patients with AD as a guide for health care providers in Canada and across the globe, using a prespecified agreement cutoff of 75%. RESULTS:: Eleven consensus statements were approved by the expert panel and reflected 4 key domains: pathophysiology, assessment, comorbidities, and treatment. CONCLUSIONS:: These statements aim to provide a framework for the assessment and management of adult patients with AD and to guide health care providers in practically relevant aspects of patient management.

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)0.070
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.092
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0700.092
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0090.007
Research integrity0.0090.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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