MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Consensus on a Patient-Centered Definition of Atopic Dermatitis Flare

2024· article· en· W4402438757 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron M. Drucker, Isabelle J. Thibau, B.S. Mantell, Katie N. Dainty, Matthew Wyke, Wendy Smith Begolka

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Dermatology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatology and Skin Diseases
Canadian institutionsNorth York General HospitalPublic Health OntarioWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersPfizerSanofiNational Eczema AssociationAmgen
KeywordsMedicineRating scaleFocus groupAtopic dermatitisFamily medicineFlareMEDLINEPsychologyDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Flare is a term commonly used in atopic dermatitis (AD) care settings and clinical research, but little consensus exists on what it means. Meanwhile, flare management is an important unmet research and treatment need. Understanding how various therapies might comparatively improve AD flares as a measure of treatment effectiveness may facilitate shared decision-making and enable assessment of effectiveness within and outside clinical settings. Objective: To identify patient-reported attributes associated with an AD flare to develop a patient-centered, consensus-based working definition. Design, Setting, and Participants: This consensus survey study used a modified eDelphi method involving consensus-building focus groups and a survey conducted from January 10 through October 24, 2023. Focus groups were conducted virtually, and the online survey was advertised to National Eczema Association members. US adults aged 18 years or older with AD were recruited via convenience sampling. Exposure: Lived experience of AD. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was consensus on which attributes of AD to include in a patient-centric definition of flare. Using a rating scale (range, 1-9), consensus for the modified eDelphi statement rating was defined as at least 70% of participants rating a statement as 7 to 9 (critical to a flare definition) and less than 15% rating it as 1 to 3 (not important). Results: Twenty-six participants with AD who completed focus group activities (24 aged 18-44 years [92.3%] and 2 aged 45-64 years [7.7%]; 18 women [69.2%]) and 631 participants with AD (mean [SD] age, 45.5 [18.1] years; 533 women [84.5%]) who completed the survey were included in the analysis. Fifteen statements reached consensus from the focus groups, and of those, 12 reached consensus from survey participants. More than half (334 of 631 [52.9%]) of survey participants reported alignment with their health care practitioner on what a flare is, and most (478 of 616 [77.6%]) reported that a patient-centered definition would be useful when communicating with their health care practitioner about their condition. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, participants with AD reached consensus on what an AD flare means from the patient perspective. This understanding may improve research and care by addressing this key patient-centered aspect of evaluating treatment effectiveness.

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)0.142
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.147
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.751

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1420.147
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA DermatologySame topicDermatology and Skin DiseasesFrench-language works237,207