Psychosocial Aspects of Adult Acne: Data from 13 European Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The link between acne and psychiatric morbidities has been demonstrated in many studies; however, large scale studies aiming to reveal the psychosocial impact of acne are rare. The aim of this study was to assess the psychological burden of adult acne patients. This analysis was based on a multicenter study including 213 acne patients and 213 controls from 13 European countries. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Dermatology Life Quality Index, and EuroQol 5 dimensions 3 levels scores of the patients with acne were analyzed. Patients with acne (n = 213) had higher HADS scores for anxiety (mean ± standard deviation 6.70 ± 3.84) and depression (3.91 ± 3.43) than the controls (p < 0.001 for both). For patients with acne, 40.6% reported that they were very concerned about their skin disease, 12.3% had suicidal ideation, and, among those, 10 (4%) patients implied that acne was the cause of their suicidal thoughts. After adjusting for other variables, patients who had suicidal ideation (p = 0.007, and adjusted odds ratio 3.32 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.39-7.93]) and stressful life events (p < 0.001, and adjusted OR 5.85 [95% CI: 2.65-12.86]) had a greater chance of fulfilling the HADS criteria for anxiety. This study highlights the need for a psychotherapeutic approach in order to recognize the concerns of acne patients and optimize their 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".