Oral Cannabidiol for Seborrheic Dermatitis in Patients With Parkinson Disease: Randomized Clinical Trial
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Seborrheic dermatitis (SD) affects 18.6%-59% of persons with Parkinson disease (PD), and recent studies provide evidence that oral cannabidiol (CBD) therapy could reduce sebum production in addition to improving motor and psychiatric symptoms in PD. Therefore, oral CBD could be useful for improving symptoms of both commonly co-occurring conditions. Objective This study investigates whether oral CBD therapy is associated with a decrease in SD severity in PD. Methods Facial photographs were collected as a component of a randomized (1:1 CBD vs placebo), parallel, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial assessing the efficacy of a short-term 2.5 mg per kg per day oral sesame solution CBD-rich cannabis extract (formulated to 100 mg/mL CBD and 3.3 mg/mL THC) for reducing motor symptoms in PD. Participants took 1.25 mg per kg per day each morning for 4 ±1 days and then twice daily for 10 ±4 days. Reviewers analyzed the photographs independently and provided a severity ranking based on the Seborrheic Dermatitis Area and Severity Index (SEDASI) scale. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics, as well as posttreatment SEDASI averages and the presence of SD, were analyzed with 2-tailed t tests and Pearson χ2 tests. SEDASI was analyzed with longitudinal regression, and SD was analyzed with generalized estimating equations. Results A total of 27 participants received a placebo and 26 received CBD for 16 days. SD severity was low in both groups at baseline, and there was no treatment effect. The risk ratio for patients receiving CBD, post versus pre, was 0.69 (95% CI 0.41-1.18; P=.15), compared to 1.20 (95% CI 0.88-1.65; P=.26) for the patients receiving the placebo. The within-group pre-post change was not statistically significant for either group, but they differed from each other (P=.07) because there was an estimated improvement for the CBD group and an estimated worsening for the placebo group. Conclusions This study does not provide solid evidence that oral CBD therapy reduces the presence of SD among patients with PD. While this study was sufficiently powered to detect the primary outcome (efficacy of CBD on PD motor symptoms), it was underpowered for the secondary outcomes of detecting changes in the presence and severity of SD. Multiple mechanisms exist through which CBD can exert beneficial effects on SD pathogenesis. Larger studies, including participants with increased disease severity and longer treatment periods, may better elucidate treatment effects and are needed to determine CBD’s true efficacy for affecting SD severity. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03582137; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03582137
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it