Hidradenitis Suppurativa Patient Referrals to a Canadian Community Dermatology Practice: A Retrospective Chart Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Awareness of hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) among non-dermatology healthcare providers is essential to facilitate prompt diagnosis, treatment, and referral to dermatology for further management. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze recent referrals to a Canadian community dermatology practice and compare the diagnostic concordance rates for HS between dermatologists and non-dermatologists. METHODS: This study was a single-centre, retrospective chart review that was completed at Beacon Dermatology in Calgary, AB. Patients who were referred by a non-dermatologist for suspicion of HS and/or were diagnosed with HS by a dermatologist at Beacon Dermatology for the first time between May 2020 and May 2023 were included. Referral letters and dermatology clinic notes were analyzed to extract patient demographics, suspected pre-referral and post-referral diagnoses, and interim management plans that were initiated by the referring provider. RESULTS: A total of 451 patient charts with suspected and/or confirmed HS were retrieved from the clinic database. The median wait time from referral to the first dermatology appointment was 9.1 weeks. The average duration of HS symptoms was 7.3 years. HS was suspected by the referring provider and confirmed by a dermatologist in 286 cases (63%). Preliminary management was initiated in 60% of mild and 66% of moderate-to-severe cases. DISCUSSION: Given the prolonged time to diagnosis of HS, increasing awareness among healthcare providers is essential. Furthermore, this study highlighted the low implementation rates for evidence-based treatment options in preliminary management plans. Ultimately, this study demonstrates the need for increased interdisciplinary education on HS management in Canada.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".