Patient education in atopic dermatitis: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that affects children and adults. Poor treatment adherence in AD requires interventions to promote self-management; patient education in chronic diseases is key to self-management. Many international AD management guidelines published to date include a recommendation for educating patients as part of their treatment but there are no formal recommendations on how to deliver this knowledge. MAIN: We performed a scoping review to map the existing literature on patient education practices in AD and to highlight the clinical need for improved patient education in AD. The literature search was performed with the online databases MEDLINE, Embase, Grey Matters, ClinicalTrails.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The search strategy yielded 388 articles. Of the 388 articles screened, 16 studies met the eligibility criteria, and the quantitative data was summarized by narrative synthesis. The majority of studies were randomized controlled trials conducted in Europe, Asia and North America. Since 2002, there have been limited studies evaluating patient education in the treatment of AD. Frequent education methods used included group-based educational programs, educational pamphlets, individual consultations and online resources. Education was most commonly directed at caregivers and their children. Only one study compared the efficacy of different education methods. In all included studies, the heterogenous nature of outcome measures and study design limited the consistency of results. Despite the heterogeneity of studies, patient education was shown to improve quality of life (QoL), disease severity and psychological outcomes in AD patients. CONCLUSION: This scoping review highlights that patient education is effective in a variety of domains relevant to AD treatment. Further comparative studies and randomized trials with longer-term follow-up are needed to provide validated and consistent patient education recommendations for AD; these may depend on age and population.
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 | 0.013 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".