Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Bullous pemphigoid (BP) is the most common subepidermal blistering disease. It is typically observed in the older adult population and rarely in children. Classic BP is characterized by tense blisters filled with clear or hemorrhagic fluid on normal skin or erythematous base with predilection for flexor surfaces. The criterion standard for diagnosing BP is with direct immunofluorescence for detection of linear deposition of immunoglobulin G or C3 at the dermoepidermal junction and/or indirect immunofluorescence for immunoglobulin G at the basement membrane zone. Treatments with efficacy in treating BP rely on anti-inflammatory or immunosuppressive properties, with corticosteroids being the primary choice of treatment. This review focuses on the clinical presentation, epidemiology, risk factors, and treatment options for BP. GENERAL PURPOSE: To review the risk factors and clinical features of bullous pemphigoid (BP) and discuss available treatment options. 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 participant will: 1. Summarize the clinical features and manifestations associated with BP. 2. Identify evidence-based methods to diagnose BP. 3. Explain evidence-based pharmacologic management strategies for the effective treatment of BP.
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 | 0.001 | 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".