MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387002827 · doi:10.1111/jdv.19451

Worldwide expert recommendations for the diagnosis and management of vitiligo: Position statement from the International Vitiligo Task Force Part 1: towards a new management algorithm

2023· article· en· W4387002827 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

VenueJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicmelanin and skin pigmentation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersSun PharmaIncytePfizer
KeywordsVitiligoMedicineDiseasePosition statementDisease managementClinical PracticeAlgorithmFamily medicineDermatologyComputer sciencePathologyParkinson's disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The treatment of vitiligo can be challenging and depends on several factors such as the subtype, disease activity, vitiligo extent, and treatment goals. Vitiligo usually requires a long-term approach. To improve the management of vitiligo worldwide, a clear and up-to-date guide based on international consensus with uniform stepwise recommendations is needed. OBJECTIVES: To reach an international consensus on the nomenclature and to develop a management algorithm for the diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of vitiligo. METHODS: In this consensus statement, a consortium of 42 international vitiligo experts and four patient representatives participated in online and live meetings to develop a consensus management strategy for vitiligo. At least two vitiligo experts summarized the evidence of topics included in the algorithms. A survey was utilized to resolve remaining issues among a core group of eight experts. Subsequently, the unanimous recommendations were finalized and validated based on further input from the entire group during two live meetings. RESULTS: The algorithms highlight the importance of shared decision-making. Dermatologists are encouraged to provide patients with detailed explanations of the prognosis and expected therapeutic outcomes based on clinical examination. The treatment goal should be discussed and clearly emphasized to patients given the different approaches for disease stabilization and repigmentation. The evaluation of disease activity remains a cornerstone in the tailor-made approach to vitiligo patients. CONCLUSIONS: These new treatment algorithms are intended to guide clinical decision-making in clinical practice. Promising novel therapies for vitiligo are on the horizon, further highlighting the need for reliable outcome measurement instruments and greater emphasis on shared decision-making.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.280 · 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