MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402549751 · doi:10.1007/s40257-024-00889-6

Update on Stevens–Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis: Diagnosis and Management

2024· review· en· W4402549751 on OpenAlexaff
Hemali Shah, Rose Parisi, Eric Mukherjee, Elizabeth J. Phillips, Roni P. Dodiuk‐Gad

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Clinical Dermatology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDrug-Induced Adverse Reactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Human Genome Research InstituteMedical Research CouncilNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsToxic epidermal necrolysisMedicineDermatologyPharmacotherapyErythrodermaIntensive care medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are the most severe cutaneous adverse reactions that are typically drug-induced in adults. Both SJS and TEN have high morbidity and mortality rates. SJS/TEN imposes clinical challenges for physicians managing patients suffering from this condition, both because it is rare and because it is a rapidly progressing systemic disease with severe cutaneous, mucosal, and systemic manifestations. Although many cases of SJS/TEN have been reported in the literature, there is no consensus regarding diagnostic criteria or treatment. Significant progress has been made in understanding its genetic predisposition and pathogenesis. This review is intended to provide physicians with a comprehensive but practical SJS/TEN roadmap to guide diagnosis and management. We review data on pathogenesis, reported precipitating factors, presentation, diagnosis, and management SJS/TEN focusing on what is new over the last 5 years.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations84
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Clinical DermatologySame topicDrug-Induced Adverse ReactionsFrench-language works237,207