Dermatologic Conditions in Down Syndrome: A Multi‐Site Retrospective Review of International Classification of Diseases Codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: As the population and life expectancy of people with Down syndrome increases, identifying common skin conditions throughout the lifespan will help inform clinical care and research. We sought to evaluate dermatologic conditions diagnosed in pediatric and adult patients with Down syndrome. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study analyzed demographic and outpatient visit International Classification of Diseases codes of patients with Down syndrome evaluated at outpatient dermatology clinics in the United States or Canada between 2011 and 2021. RESULTS: A total of 1529 patients with Down syndrome were identified from eight academic medical centers: 50.8% were children (0-12 years), 25.2% were adolescents (13-17 years), and 24% were adults (18 years and older). Eczematous dermatitis was the most common diagnosis overall (26%), followed by folliculitis (19.3%) and seborrheic dermatitis (15.6%). Other notable diagnoses included dermatophyte infections (13%), alopecia areata (11.6%), and psoriasis (6.7%). About 4.3% of visits included a code for high-risk medication use. Eczematous dermatitis, alopecia areata, and folliculitis were the most common diagnoses observed in children; folliculitis, hidradenitis suppurativa, and eczematous dermatitis in adolescents; and seborrheic dermatitis, eczematous dermatitis, and folliculitis in adults. CONCLUSIONS: Dermatologic conditions in patients with Down syndrome vary by age, but are most often eczematous, adnexal, and cutaneous autoimmune disorders. This multicenter retrospective review identifies skin diseases that should be prioritized for clinical care guideline development and research in the Down syndrome community.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".