MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385073537 · doi:10.1007/s13555-023-00980-6

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Sociodemographic, Clinical, and Treatment Characteristics Among Patients with Atopic Dermatitis in the United States and Canada: Real-World Data from the CorEvitas Atopic Dermatitis Registry

2023· article· en· W4385073537 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan I. Silverberg, Vivian Y. Shi, Andrew Alexis, Evangeline Pierce, Angel M. Cronin, Robert R. McLean, Carla Roberts‐Toler, María José Rueda, Amber Reck Atwater, Eric L. Simpson

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatology and Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChugai PharmaceuticalGenentechLEO PharmaSun PharmaRegeneron PharmaceuticalsCelgeneBristol-Myers SquibbEli Lilly and CompanyOrtho DermatologicsJanssen PharmaceuticalsGilead SciencesUnion Chimique BelgeSanofiAmgenPfizerGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsAtopic dermatitisEthnic groupMedicineDermatologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: This real-world, cross-sectional study compared sociodemographic, clinical and treatment characteristics, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among racial/ethnic groups in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD) who are candidates for systemic therapy. METHODS: ≥ 3 and Eczema Area and Severity Index [EASI] ≥ 12) at enrollment. Patients were categorized into five mutually exclusive racial/ethnic groups: non-Hispanic White, Black, Asian, Other/Multiracial, and Hispanic (any race). Patient, clinical, and treatment characteristics were captured at enrollment. Differences in means or proportions of characteristics among racial/ethnic groups were descriptively summarized using effect sizes. Adjusted prevalence ratios and mean differences were estimated (White race/ethnicity group as the reference category) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Among 1288 patients, 64% (n = 822) were White, 13% (n = 167) Black, 10% (n = 129) Asian, 8% (n = 97) Hispanic, and 6% (n = 73) Other/Multiracial. In adjusted analyses, statistically more severe EASI lichenification was noted among Black compared with White patients at the head and neck (mean difference, 0.21, [95% CI 0.06, 0.36]; p = 0.01), trunk (0.32, [0.17, 0.47]; p < 0.001), upper extremities (0.27, [0.09, 0.44]; p = 0.008), and lower extremities (0.39, [0.21, 0.57]; p < 0.001). Statistically more severe EASI lichenification was observed among Asian vs White patients in certain areas (mean difference, head and neck, 0.22 [0.04, 0.39], p = 0.01; trunk, 0.25 [0.07, 0.43], p < 0.001; lower extremities, 0.22 [0.01, 0.43], p < 0.001) and SCORing for AD lichenification (mean difference: 0.34 [0.15, 0.52]; p < 0.001). Significantly higher mean pruritus over the past 7 days for Black (mean difference: 0.63 [0.01, 1.26] and Hispanic patients (0.60 [0.11, 1.09]; p = 0.03) vs White patients was observed. Among AD clinical features, the prevalence of facial erythema was significantly lower among Black compared with White patients (prevalence ratio = 0.38, [0.22, 0.67]; p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Racial/ethnic differences exist in sociodemographic, clinical and treatment characteristics, disease severity, and PROs among real-world AD patients who are candidates for systemic therapy. Recognizing these variations may be of critical importance for dermatologists for the design and delivery of targeted/personalized medicine approaches.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.260 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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