MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903130582 · doi:10.5430/jst.v9n1p1

Actinic keratosis prevention – A double-blind, half-face interventional study with a topical treatment

2018· article· en· W2903130582 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elisabetta Sorbellini, Barbara Marzani, Daniela Pinto, Fabio Rinaldi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Solid Tumors · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboLesionDermatologyActinic keratosisAnthraquinoneTarget lesionSkin lesionSurgeryInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Actinic keratosis (AK) is a chronic and recurrent disease and in this double-blind, half face, placebo controlled study we attempt to examine the efficacy of a topical treatment containing 2,4,6-octatrienoic acid and anthraquinone knipholone for the prevention of new AK lesion formations. New lesion onset was detected with methyl-5-aminolevulinic acid and Wood’s lamp after 6 months of treatment (T1) and 12 months after treatment end (T2). Absence of new lesion at T1, was 86.11% in active treatment side while 77.78% in placebo side. At T2 the percentage was higher in skin treated with active product (83.33% of subjects) compared to placebo (63.89% of subjects).Taking into consideration the number of new lesions during the study period, at T1 the new AK lesions were not statistically significantly influenced by the treatments, while at T2, AK lesions were detected in 30.55% of placebo-treated area while in the contralateral part the lesions were 13.89%. The reduction induced by active treatment was statistically significant.The product containing 2,4,6-octatrienoicienoic acid and anthraquinone knipholone is effective in reducing new AK lesion formation in subjects with a history of AKs.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Solid TumorsSame topicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207