MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024109368

Patient Preferences and Therapeutic Satisfaction with Topical Agents for Rosacea: A Survey-Based Study.

2018· article· en· W3024109368 on OpenAlexaff
Todd Williamson, Wendy Y. Cheng, Nora McCormick, Francis Vekeman

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and Effects
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRosaceaMedicineDermatology Life Quality IndexDermatologyPatient satisfactionMedical prescriptionQuality of life (healthcare)AcnePsychological interventionSurgeryPsoriasisPsychiatryPharmacology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory skin disorder that primarily affects the convexities of the central face. Depending on the severity and type of rosacea, physicians may prescribe interventions such as behavioral changes, laser and intense pulsed light, as well as various pharmacologic therapies, including topical agents. The impact of side effects associated with topical treatments for rosacea on patient preferences and treatment satisfaction is not well-documented. OBJECTIVE: To assess patients' concerns, treatment satisfaction, and quality of life (QOL) associated with topical treatments for rosacea. METHODS: Patients were identified for participation in a one-time survey from electronic medical records between 2010 and 2015 from the largest privately held and physician-run multispecialty group practice in Massachusetts. Patients were eligible to participate in the survey if they were aged ≥18 years and had ≥1 diagnoses of rosacea, ≥1 prescriptions for topical metronidazole gel/cream or azelaic acid gel, ≥6 months of follow-up, and an active treatment record in 2014. Treatment-related concerns and their importance were assessed using a questionnaire developed for this study. Treatment satisfaction and QOL were evaluated using the Treatment Satisfaction with Medicines Questionnaire (SATMED-Q) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), respectively. RESULTS: Of the 900 eligible patients surveyed, 216 (24%) responded. Among the responders, 122 reported currently using a topical rosacea treatment. The most common treatment-related concerns were efficacy (64.8%), skin dryness (18.4%), unspecified side effects (9.6%), burning sensation (8.8%), and application technique (8.0%). The treatment-related concerns that were assessed as most important by responders included efficacy (mean score 9.1, on a 10-point scale), soreness (7.6), itching (7.5), burning (7.4), and dryness (7.3). Averaged across all the responders, treatment satisfaction was rated as neutral (mean SATMED-Q score, 56.5), whereas the impact of rosacea on QOL was minimal (mean DLQI score, 2.7). Increasing dryness was significantly associated with worsening QOL, and trends toward significance were observed for increasing soreness, itching, and burning sensations. CONCLUSIONS: The survey results suggest a need for novel topical therapies for patients with rosacea that have increased efficacy and tolerability, which may improve patient satisfaction and QOL.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and EffectsFrench-language works237,207