Efficacy of Treatments in Reducing Inflammatory Lesion Count in Rosacea: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Rosacea is a chronic inflammatory skin condition affecting approximately 5.5% of the global population. Patients present heterogeneously with a mix of features in the central facial region, of which papules and pustules are considered to be a major feature. The identification of effective treatments for reducing inflammatory lesions in rosacea can alleviate the psychosocial burden that many rosacea patients experience, including reduced self-esteem, anxiety, and social withdrawal. The objective of this systematic review is to determine the effectiveness of topical and systemic therapies in reducing lesion count in rosacea patients. METHODS/RESULTS: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched, resulting in the inclusion of 43 clinical trials reporting on a total of 18,347 rosacea patients. The most well-studied treatments include ivermectin, metronidazole, azelaic acid, minocycline, and doxycycline. Oral isotretinoin was the most effective treatment in reducing inflammatory lesions and may be recommended for severe recalcitrant cases of rosacea. CONCLUSIONS: Several topical and systemic therapies have demonstrated efficacy in reducing inflammatory lesion count in rosacea patients, with mechanisms of action centred around suppressing inflammation and killing Demodex folliculorum mites. Additional research is required to determine effective combination therapies in rosacea.

ChatGPT-3.5 and Bing Chat in ophthalmology: an updated evaluation of performance, readability, and informative sources.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Experimental investigation. Bing Chat (Microsoft) integration with ChatGPT-4 (OpenAI) integration has conferred the capability of accessing online data past 2021. We investigate its performance against ChatGPT-3.5 on a multiple-choice question ophthalmology exam. SUBJECTS/METHODS: In August 2023, ChatGPT-3.5 and Bing Chat were evaluated against 913 questions derived from the Academy's Basic and Clinical Science Collection collection. For each response, the sub-topic, performance, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook readability score (measuring years of required education to understand a given passage), and cited resources were collected. The primary outcomes were the comparative scores between models, and qualitatively, the resources referenced by Bing Chat. Secondary outcomes included performance stratified by response readability, question type (explicit or situational), and BCSC sub-topic. RESULTS: Across 913 questions, ChatGPT-3.5 scored 59.69% [95% CI 56.45,62.94] while Bing Chat scored 73.60% [95% CI 70.69,76.52]. Both models performed significantly better in explicit than clinical reasoning questions. Both models performed best on general medicine questions than ophthalmology subsections. Bing Chat referenced 927 online entities and provided at-least one citation to 836 of the 913 questions. The use of more reliable (peer-reviewed) sources was associated with higher likelihood of correct response. The most-cited resources were eyewiki.aao.org, aao.org, wikipedia.org, and ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Bing Chat showed significantly better readability than ChatGPT-3.5, averaging a reading level of grade 11.4 [95% CI 7.14, 15.7] versus 12.4 [95% CI 8.77, 16.1], respectively (p-value < 0.0001, ρ = 0.25). CONCLUSIONS: The online access, improved readability, and citation feature of Bing Chat confers additional utility for ophthalmology learners. We recommend critical appraisal of cited sources during response interpretation.

Utility of ChatGPT for Automated Creation of Patient Education Handouts: An Application in Neuro-Ophthalmology.

BACKGROUND: Patient education in ophthalmology poses a challenge for physicians because of time and resource limitations. ChatGPT (OpenAI, San Francisco) may assist with automating production of patient handouts on common neuro-ophthalmic diseases. METHODS: We queried ChatGPT-3.5 to generate 51 patient education handouts across 17 conditions. We devised the "Quality of Generated Language Outputs for Patients" (QGLOP) tool to assess handouts on the domains of accuracy/comprehensiveness, bias, currency, and tone, each scored out of 4 for a total of 16. A fellowship-trained neuro-ophthalmologist scored each passage. Handout readability was assessed using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG), which estimates years of education required to understand a text. RESULTS: The QGLOP scores for accuracy, bias, currency, and tone were found to be 2.43, 3, 3.43, and 3.02 respectively. The mean QGLOP score was 11.9 [95% CI 8.98, 14.8] out of 16 points, indicating a performance of 74.4% [95% CI 56.1%, 92.5%]. The mean SMOG across responses as 10.9 [95% CI 9.36, 12.4] years of education. CONCLUSIONS: The mean QGLOP score suggests that a fellowship-trained ophthalmologist may have at-least a moderate level of satisfaction with the write-up quality conferred by ChatGPT. This still requires a final review and editing before dissemination. Comparatively, the rarer 5% of responses collectively on either extreme would require very mild or extensive revision. Also, the mean SMOG score exceeded the accepted upper limits of grade 8 reading level for health-related patient handouts. In its current iteration, ChatGPT should be used as an efficiency tool to generate an initial draft for the neuro-ophthalmologist, who may then refine the accuracy and readability for a lay readership.

A global systematic scoping review of literature on the sexual exploitation of boys.

BACKGROUND: Sexual exploitation of children (SEC) is a widespread crime which impacts the child victim across developmental, health and well-being domains. As victims, boys have received much less clinical and research attention. While context-specific factors likely shape the SEC risk, under-recognized gender norms can deny boys' vulnerability. Professional failures to recognize and respond adequately to boys' sexual exploitation may prevent access to support. OBJECTIVE: This systematic scoping review updates and broadens a previous review of literature addressing prevalence, victim/offender/facilitator characteristics, control mechanisms, as well as the health correlates and outcomes regarding sexual exploitation of boys. This review included international peer-reviewed and gray literature from 38 countries in 14 languages. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Studies from the years 2000 to 2022 that included samples of boys under age 18, or sex-disaggregated data for children under 18, were included. Case studies, systematic reviews, and those reporting on retrospective experiences by adults over 18 were excluded. A total of 254,744 boys were represented across 81 studies. METHODS: A systematic scoping review considered qualitative and quantitative peer-reviewed publications from eight, English-language databases. English and non-English non-peer reviewed publications ('gray literature') was identified by both ECPAT International's global network of member organizations and citation chaining. RESULTS: Overall, 81 peer-reviewed (n = 51) and gray literature (n = 30) documents from 38 countries were included. In total, 254,744 youth participated in peer-reviewed studies (N = 217,726) and gray literature (N = 37,018). General prevalence of sexual exploitation of boys was reported at up to 5 %, with higher rates noted in specifically vulnerable sub-populations (e.g., 10 %, trans youth; 26 %, street-connected youth). The literature indicates that sexual exploitation of boys is reported as occurring primarily between 12 and 18 years old. Multi-level factors are linked to SEC, including individual (e.g., disability status), relationship (e.g., child maltreatment, dating violence), community (e.g., community violence), and societal domains (e.g., discriminatory beliefs). SEC victimization is linked with youth mental and physical health concerns, particularly sexual health. Post-traumatic stress symptomatology or disorder was rarely evaluated. Evidence-based treatments were not available, which may be related to a lack of gender-based theoretical models for understanding SEC specifically. CONCLUSION: The sexual exploitation of boys is a prevalent public health, child rights, and clinical issue. All young people experiencing sexual exploitation face sex- and gender-specific challenges, and this remains the case for boys with indications including family rejection, implicit community tolerance for abuse to service accessibility barriers. Actioning our duty to care for all children requires gender- and trauma-informed lenses. Ongoing surveillance of all forms of violence against children, with gender disaggregation, is essential for practice and policy advancement.

Sexual exploitation of children: Barriers for boys in accessing social supports for victimization.

BACKGROUND: The global evidence regarding sexual exploitation of children (SEC) is expanding, however, the majority of research continues to focus on girls. ECPAT International's Global Boys Initiative is a major contribution to broadening knowledge by exploring how sexual exploitation impacts boys specifically. OBJECTIVE: This discussion paper explores data from the initiative to better understand how boys and children of all genders may be impacted by sexual exploitation. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: During 2019-21, research was undertaken by ECPAT member organizations into the sexual exploitation of boys in 10 primarily low-and-middle income countries globally. The initiative also supported a global systematic scoping review of published and gray literature published in this issue (Moss et al., in press). METHODS: Gender norms analysis of Initiative data identifies critical thematic issues impairing access to support services for victimized boys. RESULTS: Most disconcerting is gender-based stigmatization from services that can compound children's trauma. Justice-based, rather than trauma-informed models of support predominate in responses for boys. Legal frameworks create barriers when binary gendered terminology defines sexual violence, thereby excluding anyone other than women and girls from protection. CONCLUSIONS: Three solutions emerged to improve access to support for more children affected by sexual exploitation: (1) challenge problematic gender norms and consequent practices, such as gendered terminology in legislation, that create barriers for boys and gender-diverse children; (2) create psychologically, emotionally, and physically safe circumstances (i.e. trauma-informed care) for all children to know help-seeking is possible; and (3) undertake proactive support that specifically connects boys and gender-diverse children to therapeutic services like drop-in centers, night-time counseling, and emergency shelter.