Genital Psoriasis: Shining Light on This Hidden Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background Psoriasis occurring on the skin of the genital and perigenital regions, including the inguinal creases, vulva, penis, scrotum, perianal area, and the intergluteal cleft, has specific diagnostic and treatment requirements due to the sensitivity and private nature of these areas. Objectives A multidisciplinary group of 13 US‐based clinicians who are experts in the management of genital psoriasis, the Genital Psoriasis Wellness Consortium, convened to discuss the impact of genital psoriasis on patients focusing on three main domains: (1) physical diagnosis and patient conversations, (2) impact on patient quality of life/interpersonal relationships, and (3) treatment decisions. Methods A PubMed literature search was conducted, and the Consortium members used the results to formulate their consensus statements using a modified Delphi process, including a nominal group technique. The process included two rounds of virtual subcommittee meetings based on the three domains, followed by surveys to obtain anonymous feedback, and concluded with a final meeting to discuss and finalize the language of the consensus recommendations across all three domains. Three additional psoriasis experts provided feedback on these consensus statements from Canadian, European, and Asian perspectives. Results Herein, we report our 14 consensus statements and a summary of the supporting data. Conclusions These consensus statements are meant as a practical resource for clinicians to ensure that symptoms of genital psoriasis are not overlooked. We hope to continue to add to these statements as additional clinical data become available.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".