MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W67536345 · doi:10.1177/120347540000400209

Chronic Urticaria: A Canadian Perspective on Patterns and Practical Management Strategies

2000· article· en· W67536345 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jasdeep K. Sharma, Robert F. Miller, Scott Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrticaria and Related Conditions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadioallergosorbent testIncidence (geometry)DermatologyEpidemiologyAngioedemaAllergyTest (biology)Family medicineInternal medicineImmunologyAllergen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic urticaria is a common condition and is a source of great frustration to patients. It has been suggested that there may be differences among physicians in their approach to this common clinical entity. OBJECTIVE AND METHOD: A questionnaire was distributed Canada-wide to allergists, dermatologists, and a selection of practitioners with an interest in alternative medicine. The survey included questions on demographics, epidemiology, causative factors, diagnostic methods, therapeutic strategies, follow-up advice, and efficacy of therapies, with emphasis on personal experience. RESULTS: The response rates of allergists and dermatologists were 31% and 36%, respectively. There was wide representation from all regions of Canada and from physicians from all age groups, both genders, different types of practice, and years in practice. The reported incidence per month was 13 and 4 patients for allergists and dermatologists, respectively. The prevalence was 199 and 44 patients by allergists and dermatologists, respectively. Comparison of causative factors showed differences in the experiences of the two groups. Diagnostic investigations were requested in a similar pattern with respect to timing. The specific tests ordered by the groups showing statistical difference were complete blood count (CBC), differential, C4 complement, antinuclear antibodies, and IgE antibody assay. Allergists chose the skin prick test (100%) as the most important allergy test. Dermatologists ranked skin prick (50%), radioallergosorbent test (RAST) (20%), and skin patch (30%) as the most important tests. The top six choices of pharmaceutical therapies chosen by the groups were similar, but in a slightly different order. The responders ranked their personal selection of antihistamines according to effectiveness. Hydroxyzine (Atarax) and cetirizine (Reactine, Allegra) were selected as first and second most effective agents by both groups. The results also show effective experience by both groups with nonsedating and sedating antihistamines. Also, doxepin, ketotifen, and cimetidine are used frequently by both groups. The experience of dermatologists in Canada with respect to other modalities including psoralen ultraviolet A (PUVA) therapy, danazol, chelation, calcium channel blockers, and acyclovir is limited and efficacy is ranked either neutral or ineffective. Allergists reported even less experience with these therapies. CONCLUSION: Allergists and dermatologists across Canada show interesting similarities and differences in their practical approach to the management of chronic urticaria. With the sharing of this information, these two specialties will be better equipped to effectively manage patients suffering from chronic urticaria.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cutaneous Medicine and SurgerySame topicUrticaria and Related ConditionsFrench-language works237,207