MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404292267 · doi:10.1136/bcr-2024-260364

Aquagenic urticaria: presentation, diagnosis and management

2024· article· en· W4404292267 on OpenAlexaff
Parsa Abdi, Jennifer M Stuckless

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Case Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrticaria and Related Conditions
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOmalizumabCetirizineDermatologyIntensive care medicineProvocation testObservational studyRegimenPediatricsSurgeryAlternative medicinePathologyImmunologyImmunoglobulin E

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aquagenic urticaria, a rare dermatological condition characterised by urticarial eruptions following water contact, poses significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. This condition, although uncommon, necessitates heightened clinical awareness due to its substantial impact on the patient's quality of life. We present a comprehensive account of a paediatric case involving a girl in her mid-teens, who developed recurrent wheals post-exposure to water, independent of its temperature or source. Diagnosis hinged on a detailed clinical history and a definitive water provocation test, with routine laboratory assessments yielding no contributory findings. The therapeutic regimen featuring cetirizine yielded significant symptomatic relief. Although antihistamines are the cornerstone of treatment, the differential response among individuals necessitates an individualised approach, considering adjunctive treatments such as omalizumab and ultraviolet therapy. This case reinforces the critical role of clinical acumen in the recognition and diagnosis of aquagenic urticaria and calls for further research into its pathophysiology to refine treatment strategies.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
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 head0.329
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Case ReportsSame topicUrticaria and Related ConditionsFrench-language works237,207