Patient-Oriented Priorities for Pediatric Erythromelalgia: A Priority-Setting Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Erythromelalgia is a rare condition characterized by burning pain, redness, and warmth primarily in the extremities, usually worsened by heat and alleviated by cold. The objective of this study was to identify the top 10 priorities in pediatric erythromelalgia from multiple perspectives, including clinicians, people with lived experience of childhood-onset erythromelalgia, and their family members. Methods: A modified James Lind Alliance Priority-Setting Process was conducted. The top priorities were identified through four phases: (1) an international online survey to gather priorities, (2) data processing, (3) an interim prioritization online survey, and (4) a virtual workshop to set the final priorities. Results: In phase 1, 185 potential priorities were submitted by 74 respondents (53% patients, 24% family members, and 23% clinicians) that were developed into 68 unique research questions (phase 2). In phase 3, of the 68 questions, 50 were rated for importance by 58 participants (38% patients, 36% family members, and 26% clinicians), reducing the list to 25 questions. In phase 4, the top 10 was reached through consensus by 12 participants (33% patients, 25% family members, and 42% clinicians) across Canada, South Africa, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom. Conclusions: The final priorities focused on the treatment of erythromelalgia, understanding underlying mechanisms, the association of erythromelalgia with various body systems, and generating awareness. This list is the first international patient-centered research agenda for childhood-onset erythromelalgia and a call to action from key partners to improve future research and care.
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 | 0.147 | 0.147 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".