Surgical Procedural Definitions for Hidradenitis Suppurativa Developed by Expert Delphi Consensus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Various surgical approaches for hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) have been described in the literature, but the nomenclature is inconsistent. Excisions have been described as wide, local, radical, and regional with variable descriptions of margins. Deroofing procedures have been described with various approaches though descriptions of the approach are generally more uniform. No international consensus has been formed to globally standardize terminology for HS surgical procedures. Lack of such agreement may contribute to misunderstanding or misclassification in HS procedural research studies and impair clear communication among clinicians or between clinicians and patients. Objective: To create a set of standard definitions for HS surgical procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants: This consensus agreement study was conducted from January to May 2021 using the modified Delphi consensus method to reach agreement among a group of international HS experts regarding standardized definitions for an initial set of HS surgical terms, including "incision and drainage," "deroofing/unroofing," "excision," "lesional excision," and "regional excision," ultimately expanded to 10 terms. Provisional definitions were drafted based on existing literature and discussion among an expert 8-member steering committee. Online surveys were disseminated to members of the HS Foundation, direct contacts of the expert panel, and the HSPlace listserv to reach physicians with considerable experience with HS surgery. Consensus was defined as greater than 70% agreement to accept a definition. Results: In the first and second modified Delphi round, 50 and 33 experts participated, respectively. Ten surgical procedural terms and definitions reached consensus with greater than 80% agreement. Overall, the term "local" excision was abandoned and replaced with the descriptors "lesional" or "regional" excision. Of note, "regional" replaced the terms "wide" and "radical" excision. Furthermore, modifiers such as "partial" vs "complete" should also be included when describing surgical procedures. A combination of these terms helped formulate the final glossary of HS surgical procedural definitions. Conclusion and Relevance: An international group of HS experts agreed on a set of definitions describing surgical procedures frequently used by clinicians and in the literature. The standardization and application of such definitions are vital to allow for accurate communication, reporting consistency, and uniform data collection and study design in the future.
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 | 0.213 | 0.217 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".