MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971379414 · doi:10.1111/exd.14027

Allergy promotes alopecia areata in a subset of patients

2019· article· en· W2971379414 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Dermatology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlopecia areataAtopic dermatitisMedicineFilaggrinAllergyImmunoglobulin EDesensitization (medicine)ImmunologyDermatologyAtopyAsthmaInternal medicineAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this commentary, we focus on allergy as a facilitating factor in the pathogenesis of alopecia areata (AA). From previous studies on AA, it is well known that subsets of patients can have one or more of; seasonal relapse, comorbid atopic rhinitis, asthma and dermatitis, lesion infiltrating eosinophils and plasma cells, high levels of total IgE, specific IgE for house dust mites (HDMs), and/or disrupted skin barrier function by the evaluation of filaggrin. Allergy and AA share a similar genetic background; both contributing to an immune reaction imbalance. Furthermore, adjunctive treatment with antihistamines, or desensitization for HDM, can reduce the severity of alopecia in atopic AA patients. Therefore, allergies may contribute to the onset and relapse of AA. Identification of an allergic or atopic immune component in AA patient subsets may indicate adjunctive treatment intervention measures against allergies should be taken which may improve the success of conventional AA treatment.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · 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