Chronic hidradenitis suppurativa: morbidity patterns and patients’ routing in Saint-Petersburg
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. The prevalence of chronic hidradenitis suppurativa (CHS) in the population is about 0.1%, the current economic burden in Russia at the beginning of 2023 is estimated to be 43.9 billion rubles per year for population (300 thousand rubles per 1 patient). Genetically engineered biological agents (GEBA) may be recommended for patients as the first-line therapy. The extension of the GEBA application has changed the appealability and feasibility of achieving positive treatment outcomes. Objective. To develop the proposals on inter-team routing and optimization of the pharmaceutical provision of patients with CHS (ICD-10 code L73.2). Material and methods. The study provides the data from clinical practice based on healthcare organizations of Saint-Petersburg, data extrapolation on the Russian Federation. The routing of patients with CHS in Saint-Petersburg was described. Appealability of patients with CHS to the appropriate specialists (surgeons, dermatovenereologists) was evaluated. The amount of additional financing required for effective treatment of patients with severe and moderate forms of the disease was calculated. Results. It is estimated that 146.4 thousand people are affected by CHS in the Russian Federation. Patients with moderate and severe forms of the disease seek surgeons and dermatovenereologists medical care. Almost 87% of patients with moderate and severe forms of CHS receive medical care from a surgeon, which leads to more frequent recurrences and repeated surgical interventions (symptomatic therapy). One in seven to eight patients with moderate and severe forms of CHS receive medical care from a dermatovenereologist, which potentially provides them with GEBA (pathogenetic therapy). Conclusion. Inter-team routing of patients is not organized. The proportion of severe forms of CHS, in which the prescription of GEBA is indicated, accounts for 0.5% (733 people in the RF), the amount of additional financing — 0.74 billion rubles. It is necessary to develop and approve the guidelines for the management of patients with CHS, regulating the inter-team interaction of specialists and optimizing the routing of 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".