MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306809750 · doi:10.1007/s13555-022-00823-w

The Impact of Global Health Disparities on Atopic Dermatitis in Displaced Populations: Narrowing the Health Equity Gap for Patients with Skin of Color

2022· review· en· W4306809750 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sami Jelousi, Divya Sharma, Andrew Alexis, Jenny E. Murase

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatology and Therapy · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUCB PharmaBausch HealthLEO PharmaGaldermaDermiraRegeneron PharmaceuticalsSanofiPfizerEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsAtopic dermatitisMedicineDiseaseRefugeeHealth equityPopulationEnvironmental healthPublic healthDermatologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a relatively common inflammatory skin disease marked by eczematous lesions and pruritus often leading to significant morbidity and quality of life impairment for those affected. Recent studies have shown that patients with skin of color (SOC) carry a larger disease burden than patients of European descent. In the USA, these disparities are partly due to structural, environmental, and interpersonal racism. From a global perspective, there is a paucity of research on the burden of atopic dermatitis and other inflammatory skin diseases experienced by the record numbers of refugees, migrants, and asylum seekers around the world. Although it is still unclear whether the true prevalence of AD in displaced communities is higher compared with the general population, those who are displaced suffer from unique risk factors that render them especially vulnerable. In this review, we outline a number of factors contributing to AD susceptibility and/or aggravation in displaced communities. These include poor living conditions, climate change events, psychological stress, and lack of access to medical care and health-related behaviors.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.362 · 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
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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatology and TherapySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207