MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Bed Bug Infestation: An Updated Review

2023· review· en· W4364351868 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

VenueCurrent Pediatric Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatological diseases and infestations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBed bugMedicineDermatologyCimex lectulariusErythemaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past decade, there has been a global resurgence of bed bug infestations, especially in developed countries. Proper awareness and identification of bed bug infestations are essential to guide treatment and eradication. The purpose of this article is to familiarize physicians with bed bug bites so that they can effectively diagnose, treat, and address questions about bed bug bites and infestations. Bed bug bites are often painless. Typical reactions include pruritic, erythematous maculopapules occurring in clusters or in a linear or curvilinear distribution in exposed areas of the body. A small red punctum may be visualized at the center of the bite mark. Lesions that appear three in a row and papules on the upper eyelid associated with erythema and edema are highly suggestive of bites from bed bugs. Exaggerated local reactions such as vesicles, urticarial wheals, urticarial perilesional plaques, diffuse urticaria, bullae, and nodules may occur in previously sensitized individuals. Reactions to bed bug bites are self-limited. As such, treatment is mainly symptomatic. Topical pramoxine and oral antihistamines can be used to alleviate pruritus. Topical corticosteroids can be used for significant eruptions to control inflammation and pruritus, and to hasten resolution of the lesions. Integrated pest management, an approach for the eradication of bed bugs, includes monitoring devices (active monitors include the use of heat or carbon dioxide attractants and passive monitors include the use of sticky pads for trapping), and judicious use of nonchemical and chemical treatments known to be effective. Nonchemical interventions include keeping affected areas clean and free of clutter, vacuuming, washing linens with hot water, caulking wall holes and cracks where bugs can hide, proper disposal of highly infested items, and placement of bed bug traps/interceptors at the base of beds and furniture. Chemical interventions involve the use of insecticides such as synthetic pyrethroids, silicates, insect growth disruptors, carbamates, organophosphates, neonicotinoids, diethyl-meta-toluamide, chlorfenapyr, fipronil and plant essential oils. Insecticides should be used with caution to prevent over-exposure and toxicity (in particular, cardiovascular and neurologic toxicity), especially if there are young children around. It is important to note that multiple mechanisms of insecticide resistance exist and as such, chemical treatment should only be undertaken by trained professionals who understand the current literature on resistance. Both nonchemical and chemical technologies should be combined for optimal results. Bed bug infestations may cause diverse dermal reactions, stigmatization, poor self-esteem, emotional stress, anxiety, significant adverse effect on quality of life, and substantial socioeconomic burden to society. As such, their rapid detection and eradication are of paramount importance. Consultation with a professional exterminator is recommended to fully eradicate an infestation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.704
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.014

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.495
Teacher spread0.214 · 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