MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043140630 · doi:10.1159/000508927

Patient Satisfaction with Treatment for Onychocryptosis: A Systematic Review

2020· review· en· W3043140630 on OpenAlexaff
Claire Stewart, Leah Algu, Rakhshan Kamran, Cameron F. Leveille, Khizar Abid, Charlene Rae, Shari R. Lipner

Bibliographic record

VenueSkin Appendage Disorders · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNail Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePatient-reported outcomePatient satisfactionQuality of life (healthcare)Psychological interventionPhysical therapyMEDLINESurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Onychocryptosis, or ingrown nail, is a common condition in which the nail plate penetrates the nail fold, often resulting in inflammation and pain. Nonsurgical and surgical treatments are utilized, but patient satisfaction with these therapies has not been well studied. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the available literature describing patient-reported outcomes of onychocryptosis treatments. We performed a search of the literature published prior to May 22, 2019. Articles were included in the review if primary data were presented, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were used, and nail involvement was specifically examined. From the initial search, 18 studies were included in the final analysis. Patients receiving both nonsurgical and surgical interventions reported high levels of overall satisfaction; however, most studies used ad hoc measures rather than validated PROMs, providing little granular information on the impact of treatment on quality of life (QoL). This review affirms that treatment for onychocryptosis results in satisfactory outcomes for patients; however, increased efforts are needed to understand the impact of therapy on patient QoL as assessed by validated outcome measure that accurately assess patients' cosmetic, physical, and social difficulties.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSkin Appendage DisordersSame topicNail Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207