Variations in Minimal Erythema Dose of 308‐nm Excimer Laser Therapy Across Anatomical Sites in Asian Patients With Vitiligo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To investigate anatomical site‐specific differences in the minimal erythema dose (MED) of 308‐nm excimer laser therapy among Asian patients with vitiligo. Methods A retrospective analysis of MED data from 378 patients was conducted. Nonparametric tests were used to compare MED values across six anatomical sites and facial subregions, while Spearman correlation assessed influencing factors. Results MED values in lesional skin were significantly higher than in normal skin. Site‐specific MED variations were observed, ranked from lowest to highest as follows: face, trunk, neck, scalp, extremities, and acral regions (hands/feet). Within facial subregions, periorbital and perioral mucosal areas exhibited 15%–25% lower MED values compared with other regions. Skin phototype, season, and age were independent predictors of MED ( P < 0.05), whereas sex, family history, and lesion size showed no significant correlation. Conclusion MED values vary significantly across anatomical sites in Asian patients with vitiligo. Clinical phototherapy protocols should incorporate site‐specific and skin type–adjusted dosing strategies, with particular attention to the lower MED thresholds of mucosal regions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".