MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403434166 · doi:10.5694/mja2.52478

Melasma in the male: a less well recognised entity

2024· article· en· W4403434166 on OpenAlexaff
Tim Aung, Rowland Noakes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Medical Journal of Australia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsSKiN Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMelasmaDermatologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An otherwise healthy man of Southeast-Asian descent aged in his mid-30s presented with non-pruritic hyperpigmented patches involving the face for over 12 months (Figure). Clinically, the findings were consistent with melasma, characterised by brown or dark brown hyperpigmented patches with demarcated or ill-defined borders, involving the face (zygoma and cheeks) bilaterally. There was no history or clinical features suggestive of diagnoses such as post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation, drug-induced pigmentation or photosensitivity, or actinic lichen planus. Melasma is a common acquired hyperpigmentary condition, described mostly in women of Asian, Middle Eastern or Latin American descent aged 30–50 years.1 Melasma in men is less well recognised,2 with a reported sex ratio of 1:9 (male:female).3 The precise aetiopathogenesis of melasma is incompletely understood. However, there are risk factors related to melasma development, such as sunlight exposure, genetic predisposition, hormonal exposure (contraceptive use and pregnancy), photosensitive medications and cosmetics use, and, rarely, thyroid disorder.2-5 Melasma can be diagnosed clinically based on distribution and characteristics of pigmentation and skin type or ethnicity; biopsy is rarely required. Management includes sun protection with the use of a wide-brim hat and sunscreen (with a sun protection factor of 30 or over), and avoidance of risk factors such as phototoxic drugs, cosmetics, and hormonal contraception (in women). The triple combined topical therapy (hydroquinone 4–5% with tretinoin 0.05–0.1% and low potency corticosteroid), daily for three months, is usually the first line treatment of choice.1-3 Adjunct oral tranexamic acid may be considered for extensive lesions, dermal involvement, or for patients refractory to topical therapy, although there are no established studies in men.2 There are also advanced treatment options, such as chemical peeling, microneedling, and light and laser-based therapies, with unpredictable or mixed results.1, 3 The patient gave written consent for publication. Open access publishing facilitated by the University of Queensland, as part of the Wiley – the University of Queensland agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians. No relevant disclosures.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Medical Journal of AustraliaSame topicDermatologic Treatments and ResearchFrench-language works237,207