MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098507190

OF THE CANADIAN DERMATOLOGY STUDY GROUP ON HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PRIMARY AXILLARY

2015· article· en· W7098507190 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSesquiterpenes and Asteraceae Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)AxillaHyperhidrosisFunctional impairmentAdverse effectDisease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND. Patients with primary axillary hyperhidrosis expe-rience substantial functional impairment and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Few studies have comprehen-sively evaluated the effects of botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A) on these symptoms. OBJECTIVE. To prospectively assess the effects of BoNT-A on functional impairment associated with primary axillary hyper-hidrosis. METHODS. Patients treated with BoNT-A 50 U per axilla at base-line were assessed 4 and 12 weeks later. Outcome measures included functional impairment as assessed by the Hyperhidrosis Disease Severity Scale and the Hyperhidrosis Impact Question-naire and dermatology-specific HRQOL as assessed by the Der-matology Life Quality Index. RESULTS. At weeks 4 and 12 after BoNT-A treatment, 85 % and 90 % of patients achieved the a priori definition of treatment responder. Patients reported less occupational and emotional impairment, spent less time managing their hyperhidrosis, and had fewer difficulties in social situations. Adverse events were uncommon (5.5%), were mild, and did not require treatment. At study end, 53 % of patients reported no dermatology-specific HRQOL impairment and 90 % were satisfied with treatment. CONCLUSIONS. Significant, meaningful, rapid, and durable reduc-tions in disease severity and functional impairment, as well as improvements in HRQOL, were seen following BoNT-A treat-ment. BoNT-A was safe and well tolerated, producing high lev-els of patient satisfaction.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.260 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSesquiterpenes and Asteraceae StudiesFrench-language works237,207