MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206010427 · doi:10.22374/jded.v5i1.40

INTENSE PULSED LIGHT (IPL) TREATMENT FOR DUPILUMAB INDUCED OCULAR SURFACE DISEASE (DIOSD)

2022· article· en· W4206010427 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sathi Maiti, Laura M. Periman, Natasha Balani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dry Eye Disease · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDupilumabMedicineIntense pulsed lightAdjunctDermatologyAtopic dermatitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PurposeTo report a case of dupilumab induced ocular surface disease (DIOSD) managed with intense pulsed light (IPL) as an effective adjunct therapy to topical steroids and topical immunomodulator lifitegrast.MethodsDiscussion of a patient’s case with accompanying anterior segment and meibography photos with diagnosed DIOSD for which adjunct therapy with IPL was an effective treatment after limited relief from and difficulty with adherence to traditional treatment with topical steroids and lifitegrast ophthalmic solutions. ConclusionThis case demonstrates the complexity of management required to treat patients with DIOSD and its chronic nature. IPL as a nonpharmaceutical adjunct therapy to topical steroids and immunomodulators in the treatment of DIOSD showed improved signs and symptoms of DIOSD.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dry Eye DiseaseSame topicAcne and Rosacea Treatments and EffectsFrench-language works237,207