OF THE CANADIAN DERMATOLOGY STUDY GROUP ON HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PRIMARY AXILLARY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".