MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283518348 · doi:10.1111/exd.14635

“Normal” TEWL‐how can it be defined? A systematic review

2022· review· en· W4283518348 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Dermatology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransepidermal water lossMedicineDermatologyInternal medicinePathologyStratum corneum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL), the total non-eccrine sweat water evaporating from a given area of epidermis over time, is a measurement of skin barrier integrity. Skin diseases (e.g., psoriasis and atopic dermatitis) often result in transient increases in TEWL, so, knowledge of "normal" TEWL values may be used to predict disease progression in dermatological settings. Variables such as age, race and anatomic location have been suggested to affect TEWL, but current regulatory agencies have failed to control for additional variables of interest. Thus, this review summarizes variables that may cause TEWL variation. A comprehensive literature search was performed using Embase, PubMed and Web of Science to find human studies that provided data on variables affecting TEWL. 31 studies, analysing 22 affecting TEWL, were identified. Variables causing increased TEWL were mask-use (n = 1), dry eye disease (n = 1), chronic venous disease (n = 1), coronary artery disease (n = 1), age (infants vs adults) (n = 4), nourishment in infants (n = 1), stress within individuals (n = 2), Body Mass Index (n = 2), bathing versus showering (n = 2) and scratching/friction (n = 1). Variables with decreases in TEWL were genetic variability with SNPs on chromosome 9q34.3 (n = 1) and cancer-cachexia (n = 1). We summarized 12 variables that impact TEWL and are not typically controlled for in experimental settings. Therefore, defining normal TEWL may currently be problematic. Thus, regulatory agencies should provide stricter guidelines on proper measurement of TEWL to minimize human introduced TEWL variation, and we should continue to examine factors impacting individual skin integrity.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.304 · 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