Determination of Knowledge of Patients Regarding Psoriasis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Psoriasis, a chronic, non-communicable skin condition, significantly impacts patients' quality of life. This study aimed to assess the knowledge levels among psoriasis patients, categorized into adequate, moderately adequate, and inadequate, to identify educational needs and opportunities for improved patient education. METHODOLOGY: This cross-sectional study was conducted at the Department of Dermatology, Imran Idrees Hospital, affiliated with Sialkot Medical College, from October 2023 to February 2024. It involved 218 patients aged 16-60 years, diagnosed with psoriasis for over a year. Knowledge levels were assessed using a self-administered questionnaire, with scores ≥7 out of 10 considered adequate knowledge. RESULTS: Out of the participants, 57.8% had inadequate knowledge about psoriasis, 32.6% had moderately adequate knowledge, and only 9.6% had adequate knowledge. The analysis showed no significant differences in knowledge levels across age, gender, duration of disease, education, and economic status (p-value > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The study revealed a significant gap in the knowledge about psoriasis among patients, emphasizing the obligation for routine patient education and counseling. This approach could improve treatment adherence and outcomes, reducing misconceptions and treatment discontinuation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".