MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042395810 · doi:10.3122/jabfm.2020.04.190449

Diagnosis and Management of Atopic Dermatitis for Primary Care Providers

2020· review· en· W3042395810 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Fleming, Yue Yang, Charles Lynde, Braden O’Neill, Kyle O. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsNorth York General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British ColumbiaToronto General HospitalSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersGaldermaSanofiPfizerEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyMEDLINEAtopic dermatitisIntensive care medicineQuality of life (healthcare)Randomized controlled trialPrimary careMedical diagnosisDiseaseDermatologyFamily medicineInternal medicinePathologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To provide primary care providers an up-to-date approach to the diagnosis and management of atopic dermatitis (AD). QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: PubMed, Cochrane, and MEDLINE databases were searched for relevant meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and observational studies about the diagnosis and management of AD. MAIN MESSAGE: AD is a common chronic skin disease characterized by immune dysregulation and skin barrier dysfunction. It has a substantial impact on quality of life across all ages. Despite this, AD is often still undertreated due to inaccurate diagnoses, even by many experienced dermatologists. Many primary care providers may not be aware of its commonly associated medical and psychiatric comorbidities or be familiar with new treatment options. CONCLUSION: In this clinical review, we describe the pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment of AD, specifically highlighting commonly used therapies and novel medications.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the American Board of Family MedicineSame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207