MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Consensus on a Patient-Centered Definition of Atopic Dermatitis Flare

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

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

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