Effects of Pain From Atopic Dermatitis: Interview and Focus Group Study With Patients and Their Families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pain is an underappreciated symptom of atopic dermatitis that can affect the health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to understand the effect of pain on patients with atopic dermatitis and their family members and to recognize how this symptom affects HRQL. METHODS: We conducted focus groups and interviews with patients with atopic dermatitis and their family members. Researchers independently coded the transcripts and reached a consensus on the major themes. RESULTS: A total of 33 adult participants, consisting of 21 patients with atopic dermatitis (median age 47 years, range 22-77) and 12 family members (median age 50, range 22-72), attended either focus groups (23/33, 70%) or interviews (10/33, 30%), where we assessed their experiences of pain. Four themes emerged in our study. Itchiness and pain can be intertwined: pain was often caused by or otherwise associated with itchiness and could result from open sores and excoriated skin. Characteristics of pain: pain was most often described as burning. Other descriptors included mild, persistent discomfort; stinging; and stabbing. Effects of pain: pain negatively affected various aspects of daily life, including choice of clothing, sleep, social activities, and relationships. The location of painful areas could also limit physical activity, including sex. Pain management: pain from atopic dermatitis could be managed to varying degrees with different over-the-counter and prescription treatments. Systemic agents that cleared the skin also resolved the pain associated with atopic dermatitis. CONCLUSIONS: Pain can be a significant factor in the HRQL of patients with atopic dermatitis and should be considered by clinicians when caring for patients with atopic dermatitis.
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 | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".