Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Pemphigus vulgaris (PV) is a rare, but potentially life-threatening (5%-30%) intraepidermal blistering disease with a mean onset age between 40 and 60 years. Disease onset typically begins in the oral mucosa prior to spreading to the skin. Classic PV is characterized by fragile flaccid blisters on normal or erythematous skin that have a tendency to break and form erosions. Diagnosis of PV can be supported by direct immunofluorescence detection of immunoglobulin G and C3 deposits on the surface of keratinocytes and immunoserology studies to detect anti-desmoglein 1/3 autoantibodies. Systemic corticosteroids are the mainstay of PV treatment and are often combined with other immunosuppressive adjuvants to improve remission rates. This review focuses on the clinical presentation, risk factors, and treatment options for PV. GENERAL PURPOSE To review the clinical presentation, diagnostic evaluation, and management approaches for pemphigus vulgaris (PV). TARGET AUDIENCE This continuing education activity is intended for physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and registered nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. LEARNING OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES After participating in this educational activity, the learner will: 1. Summarize the clinical manifestations associated with PV. 2. Evaluate risk factors associated with PV. 3. Explain evidence-based diagnostic and treatment options for PV.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".