MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401323330 · doi:10.1007/s13555-024-01241-w

Assessing Participants’ Experiences with Vitiligo from Patient Interviews

2024· article· en· W4401323330 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amit G. Pandya, Theresa Amoloja, Kristen Bibeau, Dana DiBenedetti, Katherine Kosa, Kathleen Butler, Deanna Kornacki, Khaled Ezzedine

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatology and Therapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicmelanin and skin pigmentation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIncyte
KeywordsVitiligoPsychologyMedicineDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vitiligo is an autoimmune disease, causing skin depigmentation. Individuals with vitiligo incur substantial psychosocial burden and have expressed frustration with their treatments. Here, we describe the burden of vitiligo and opinions on what constitutes meaningful change among participants of two qualitative interview studies. Qualitative interviews were conducted with a subgroup of adolescent and adult participants with vitiligo from two pivotal phase 3 clinical trials of ruxolitinib cream (Study 1) and a real-world panel (Study 2). Participants were asked about their disease burden, treatment goals, importance of facial/body improvement (treatment satisfaction: scale range 0–10), and meaningfulness of change (yes/no). A total of 36 participants from Study 1 and 23 from Study 2 were interviewed. In Study 1, the highest degree of impact was on reduced self-esteem (facial lesions, 62.5%; body lesions, 55.6%), social inhibition (facial lesions, 65.6%; body lesions, 61.1%), and sun sensitivity (facial lesions, 31.3%; body lesions, 55.6%). Most participants (83.3%) reported that facial improvement was equally (36.1%) or more important (47.2%) than body improvement, with mean treatment satisfaction of 8.1 and 6.9, respectively. Meaningful change was reported by 83.3% and 92.9% of participants with 50–74% and ≥ 75% improvement per the facial Vitiligo Area Scoring Index, respectively, and by 82.6% of participants with ≥ 25% improvement per the total Vitiligo Area Scoring Index per Study 1 outcomes at Week 24. In Study 2, most (82.6%) participants felt that the noticeability of their vitiligo affected their behavior. Nearly all (87.0%) said that an ideal treatment would repigment or return natural color to their facial skin; 56.5% considered ≥ 50% facial repigmentation to be the smallest meaningful improvement. Participants from both qualitative interviews expressed substantial psychosocial burden. Repigmentation in both facial and body vitiligo were important, with meaningful change determined to be ≥ 50% facial repigmentation and ≥ 25% body repigmentation. Vitiligo is an autoimmune disease that causes white patches to appear on the skin, affecting about 2% of people worldwide. People with vitiligo often have poor quality of life due to their disease and frequently do not believe that treatments work. We explored how people with vitiligo felt about their disease, and asked what hopes they had for treatment. Individual telephone interviews were conducted with 36 adolescents and adults with vitiligo from two clinical studies (Study 1) and 23 adolescents and adults with vitiligo from a real-world panel (Study 2) in the USA and Canada. Those from Study 1 said that their vitiligo caused them to have low self-esteem and to feel lonely. Most said that it was as important or more important to restore color to white patches on their face (i.e., repigmentation) than the body. Most achieving repigmentation of more than 50% on the face or more than 25% on the body were pleased with their treatment. In Study 2, most people said that their disease affected their behavior, and nearly all said that completely restoring color to their facial skin (i.e., 100% repigmentation) was important. Over half said that the smallest change they thought was important was more than 50% facial repigmentation. In short, people with vitiligo in two interview studies said that their vitiligo affected their quality of life. Most people with vitiligo in these studies reported that it was important to repigment more than 50% on the face and more than 25% on the body.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatology and TherapySame topicmelanin and skin pigmentationFrench-language works237,207