EADV Task Force Pruritus White Paper on chronic pruritus and chronic prurigo: Current challenges and future solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic pruritus (CP) is frequent in general medicine and the most common complaint in general dermatology. The prevalence of CP is expected to rise in the future due to the ageing population. The clinical presentation, underlying aetiology and treatment strategy of CP are heterogeneous. Also, individual treatment aims and physical, psychic and economic burdens of patients might vary. Chronic prurigo (CPG) is the most severe disease in the chronic pruritus spectrum, being associated with long-standing scratch-induced skin lesions and a therapy refractory itch-scratch-cycle. It is thus important to raise disease awareness for CP and CPG in the general public and among decision-makers in the health system. Further, there is a need to support a rational clinical framework to optimize both diagnostics and therapeutics. Currently, there is still a shortcoming regarding approved therapies and understanding CP/CPG as severe medical conditions. Therefore, the EADV Task Force Pruritus decided to publish this white paper based on several consensus meetings. The group consented on the following goals: (a) ensure that CP is recognized as a serious condition, (b) increase public awareness and understanding of CP and CPG as chronic and burdensome diseases that can greatly affect a person's quality of life, (c) clarify that in most cases CP and CPG are non-communicable and not caused by a psychiatric disease, (d) improve the support and treatment given to patients with CP to help them manage their disease and (e) publicize existing therapies including current guidelines. We aim to point to necessary improvements in access and quality of care directed to decision-makers in health policy, among payers and administrations as well as in practical care.
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 | 0.029 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.018 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.020 |
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".