MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385702453 · doi:10.1186/s13023-023-02817-z

Itch in recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa: findings of PEBLES, a prospective register study

2023· article· en· W4385702453 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jemima E. Mellerio, Elizabeth Pillay, Lesedi Ledwaba‐Chapman, Alessandra Bisquera, Susan J. Robertson, Marieta Papanikolaou, John A. McGrath, Yanzhong Wang, Anna E. Martinez, E. Jeffs

Bibliographic record

VenueOrphanet Journal of Rare Diseases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSkin and Cellular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHospital for Sick ChildrenDystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa Research Association
KeywordsMedicineDermatologyQuality of life (healthcare)DiseaseEpidermolysis bullosaDistressEpidermolysis bullosa dystrophicaInternal medicineClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Itch is common and distressing in epidermolysis bullosa (EB) but has not previously been studied in depth in different recessive dystrophic EB (RDEB) subtypes. OBJECTIVES: As part of a prospective register study of the natural history of RDEB we explored features of itch, medications used, and correlation with disease severity and quality of life. METHODS: Fifty individuals with RDEB aged 8 years and above completed the Leuven Itch Scale (LIS) (total 243 reviews over a 7-year period). Data included itch frequency, severity, duration, distress, circumstances, consequences, itch surface area and medications for itch. The iscorEB disease severity score and the validated EB quality of life tool, QOLEB, were compared to LIS domains and analysed by RDEB subtype. RESULTS: Itch was frequent, present in the preceding month in 93% of reviews. Itch severity and distress were significantly greater in severe (RDEB-S) and pruriginosa (RDEB-Pru) subtypes compared to intermediate RDEB (RDEB-I). Itch medications were reported in just over half of reviews including emollients, topical corticosteroids and antihistamines; the proportion of participants not using medication despite frequent pruritus suggests limited efficacy. In inversa RDEB (RDEB-Inv) and RDEB-I, LIS domains correlated with iscorEB and QOLEB. In contrast to previous studies, correlations were lacking in RDEB-S suggesting that global disease burden relatively reduces the contribution of itch. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive study of RDEB-associated itch highlights differences between RDEB subtypes, suggests an unmet need for effective treatments and could serve as control data for future clinical trials incorporating itch as an endpoint.

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)0.001
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrphanet Journal of Rare DiseasesSame topicSkin and Cellular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207