Qualitative Assessment of Adult Patients’ Perception of Atopic Dermatitis Using Natural Language Processing Analysis in a Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is an incurable, inflammatory skin disease characterized by skin barrier disruption and immune dysregulation. Although AD is considered a childhood disease, adult onset is possible, presenting with daily sleep disturbance and functional impairment associated with itch, neuropsychiatric issues (anxiety and depression), and reduced health-related quality of life. Although such aspects of adult AD disease burden have been measured through standardized assessments and based on population-level data, the understanding of the disease experienced at the patient level remains poor. This text-mining study assessed the impact of AD on the lives of adult patients as described from an experiential perspective. METHODS: Natural language processing (NLP) was applied to qualitative patient response data from two large-scale international cross-sectional surveys conducted in the USA and countries outside of the USA (non-USA; Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK). Descriptive analysis was conducted on patient responses to an open-ended question on how they felt about their AD and how the disease affected their life. Character length, word count, and stop word (common words) count were evaluated; centrality analysis identified concepts that were most strongly interlinked. RESULTS: Patients with AD in all countries were most frequently impacted by itch, pain, and embarrassment across all levels of disease severity. Patients with moderate-to-severe AD were more likely than patients with mild AD to describe sleep disturbances, fatigue, and feelings of depression, anxiety, and a lack of hope that were directly associated with AD. Centrality analysis revealed sleep disturbance was strongly linked with itch. Collectively, these concepts revealed that patients with AD are impacted by both physical and emotional burdens that are intricately connected. CONCLUSIONS: Qualitative data from NLP, being more patient-centric than data from clinical standardized measures, provide a more comprehensive view of the burden of AD to inform disease 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".