The use of urea for skin barrier correction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The review summarizes information about the main causes and pathogenesis of xerosis cutis as one of the conditions indicating a violation of the epidermal barrier. Xerosis cutis is a clinical sign of a decrease in the amount and/or quality of lipids and/or hydrophilic substances in the stratum corneum of the epidermis. The modern approach to the treatment of dermatoses accompanied by violations of the epidermal barrier includes basic moisturizers. Urea not only moisturizes the skin. It is involved in the regulation of barrier function and antimicrobial protection. It is a low-molecular regulator of protein synthesis in keratinocytes, such as filaggrin, loricrin, involucrin and transglutaminase 1, cathelicidin, beta-defensin-2, water and urea carrier proteins into the cell, as well as proteins that promote the synthesis of intercellular matrix lipids. The main dermatotropic pharmacological effects of urea (hydration of the epidermis, strengthening of the barrier function of the skin, keratolytic effect, increased penetration of drugs into the skin) have been used in dermatological practice for many years. External agents with urea are used to treat skin diseases accompanied by dryness and excessive keratinization, to correct the deformation of nail plates of various genesis, to facilitate the local penetration of medicines. The use of topical UrocrEM5, UrocrEM10, Uroderm ointments containing 5%, 10% and 30% urea, respectively, is effective and safe.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".