Altered Sensory and Stress Responses in Atopic Dermatitis: Effects of Acute Stress on Lesional and Non‐Lesional Skin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Itch and pain are both mediated by small sensory fibres. Atopic dermatitis (AD) patients usually report stress-induced flares, but the impact of stress on sensory fibres in lesional and non-lesional skin remains inconclusive. This observational study assessed the effect of acute stress on sensory profiles in subjects with AD (n = 18) and healthy controls (HC, n = 21). Participants completed clinical and psychological questionnaires, and quantitative sensory testing was performed on lesional and non-lesional skin in AD and healthy skin in HC. Assessments were done before and after the Montreal Imaging Stress Task, an acute stress protocol. Stress responses were evaluated by anxiety ratings, heart rate (HR) and salivary cortisol (CORT). Cortisol binding globulin (CBG) was quantified as an indirect measure for circulating CORT. AD participants reported higher anxiety, depression and stress perception than HC. HR was similar between groups, but AD participants showed a blunted CORT response post-stress and lower CBG levels, suggesting altered stress regulation. Acute stress reduced cold sensitivity in HC and non-lesional AD skin but had no effect on lesions. These findings indicate that the effects of stress on small fibres depend on the condition of the skin and emphasise the sensory alterations experienced by AD patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".