MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388912340 · doi:10.1007/s12325-023-02724-6

A Patient Charter for Chronic Urticaria

2023· article· en· W4388912340 on OpenAlexaff
Marcus Maurer, M. Madalena Albuquerque, Jean-Nicolas Boursiquot, Ana M. Giménez‐Arnau, Kiran Godse, Guillermo Guitiérrez, Amin Kanani, Gina Lacuesta, Jessica McCarthy, Simon Nigen, Tonya Winders

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrticaria and Related Conditions
Canadian institutionsMontreal General HospitalMcGill UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaDalhousie UniversityUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAngioedemaCharterQuality of life (healthcare)SpecialtyHealth carePhysical therapyFamily medicineNursingDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic urticaria (CU) is the recurring development of wheals (aka "hives" or "welts"), angioedema, or both for more than 6 weeks. Wheals and angioedema occur with no definite triggers in chronic spontaneous urticaria, and in response to known and definite physical triggers in chronic inducible urticaria. Approximately 1.4% of individuals globally will have CU during their lifetime. The itching and physical discomfort associated with CU have a profound impact on daily activities, sexual function, work or school performance, and sleep, causing significant impairment in a patient's physical and mental quality of life. CU also places a financial burden on patients and healthcare systems. Patients should feel empowered to self-advocate to receive the best care. The voice of the patient in navigating the journey of CU diagnosis and management may improve patient-provider communication, thereby improving diagnosis and outcomes. A collaboration of patients, providers, advocacy organizations, and pharmaceutical representatives have created a patient charter to define the realistic and achievable principles of care that patients with CU should expect to receive. Principle (1): I deserve an accurate and timely diagnosis of my CU; Principle (2): I deserve access to specialty care for my CU; Principle (3): I deserve access to innovative treatments that reduce the burden of CU on my daily life; Principle (4): I deserve to be free of unnecessary treatment-related side-effects during the management of my CU; and Principle (5): I expect a holistic treatment approach to address all the components of my life impacted by CU. The stated principles may serve as a guide for healthcare providers who care for patients with CU and translate into better patient-physician communication. In addition, we urge policymakers and authors of CU treatment guidelines to consider these principles in their decision-making to ensure the goals of the patient are achievable.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in TherapySame topicUrticaria and Related ConditionsFrench-language works237,207