MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942212136

Chrysiasis induced by Q Switched Nd:YAG laser: A case report and review of literature

2017· article· en· W2942212136 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hema Pant, Kritika Pandey

Bibliographic record

VenueIP Indian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dermatology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrticaria and Related Conditions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscontinuationMedicineRheumatoid arthritisDermatologyMelasmaFamily historyLaser therapyLaser treatmentGold standard (test)LaserSurgeryInternal medicineOptics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chrysiasis refers to blue to slate gray skin pigmentation induced by prolonged treatment with gold salts. Although now an uncommon modality for treatment of arthritis, chrysiasis may still be seen as it can develop even decades after discontinuation of gold therapy. We hereby report a rare case of Q-switched Nd:YAG laser induced chrysiasis in a 65 year old woman who underwent laser treatment for melasma with immediate blue-gray discoloration. She was a known case of rheumatoid arthritis with history of treatment with oral gold salts about 20 years ago. Interestingly this is the first case of chrysiasis induced by laser being reported outside of US and Canada. Dermatologists must be aware of risk of laser induced chrysiasis in individuals with history of gold therapy and this point should be included in history taking as a leading question especially in patients who have received treatment for autoimmune arthiritis (PsA, RA). Key-words: Q Switched Nd:YAG laser, Chrysiasis Key Messages: Dermatologists must be aware of risk of laser induced chrysiasis in individuals with history of gold therapy and this point should be included in history taking as a leading question especially in patients who have received treatment for autoimmune arthiritis (PsA, RA)

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIP Indian Journal of Clinical and Experimental DermatologySame topicUrticaria and Related ConditionsFrench-language works237,207