Psychodermatological Disorders in Patients With Primary Psychiatric Conditions: Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychodermatological disorders (PDs) and their associations with mental health problems are one of the most frequent research themes in dermatology outpatient settings. Surprisingly, very few studies have been conducted to evaluate PDs among patients with primary psychiatric conditions. As such, the relationship between preexisting psychiatric conditions and comorbid PDs is underrepresented in the literature. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the prevalence and distribution of PDs among adults with primary psychiatric conditions and determined their association with underlying psychiatric diagnoses. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis at a tertiary health care facility in southwestern Nigeria. Comorbid PDs were identified and classified using preexisting classification systems. A bivariate analysis was conducted to determine the association between PDs and underlying psychiatric conditions. The level of statistical significance was set at P<.05. RESULTS: The study included 107 patients with mental health disorders, of whom 64 (59.8%) were female. The mean age of the patients was 40.73 (SD 13.08) years. A total of 75 (75/107, 70%) patients had at least one comorbid PD. The prevalence of PDs was highest in patients with affective disorders (15/20, 75%) and least in those with schizophrenia (45/66, 68%). PDs associated with delusions or hallucinations and somatoform symptoms were 9 and 13 times more frequent in patients with anxiety disorders compared to those with other psychiatric conditions (P=.01; odds ratio [OR] 9.88, 95% CI 1.67-58.34 and P=.003; OR 13.13, 95% CI 2.34-73.65), respectively. In contrast, patients with schizophrenia were significantly less likely to be diagnosed with dermatoses resulting from delusions or hallucinations (P=.002; OR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00-0.75). A weak but significant negative association was also found between psychophysiological PDs and anxiety disorders (ϕ=-0.236; P=.02). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides important insights into the overwhelming burden of psychodermatological conditions in patients with mental health disorders and specific associations with underlying psychiatric diagnosis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".