No abstract

Despite facing daunting odds of academic success compared with their more socioeconomically advantaged peers, many students from low socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds maintain high levels of academic motivation and persist in the face of difficulty. We propose that for these students, academic persistence may hinge on their perceptions of socioeconomic mobility, or their general beliefs regarding whether or not socioeconomic mobility—a powerful academic motivator—can occur in their society. Specifically, low-SES students' desire to persist on a primary path to mobility (i.e., school) should remain strong if they believe that socioeconomic mobility can occur in their society. By contrast, those who believe that socioeconomic mobility generally does not occur should be less motivated to persist academically. One correlational and two experimental studies provide support for this hypothesis among low (but not high) SES high school and university students. Implications for future intervention efforts are discussed.

8. Duffin KC, Yeung H, Takeshita J, et al. Patient satisfaction with treatments for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in clinical practice. Br J Dermatol. 2014;170(3):672-680. 9. Weinstein GD, Koo JY, Krueger GG, et al. Tazarotene cream in the treatment of psoriasis: two multicenter, double-blind, randomized, vehicle-controlled studies of the safety and efficacy of tazarotene creams 0.05% and 0.1% applied once daily for 12 weeks. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003;48(5):760-767. 10. Gupta SK, Singh KK, Lalit M. Comparative therapeutic evaluation of different topicals and narrow band ultraviolet B therapy combined with systemic methotrexate in the treatment of palmoplantar psoriasis. Indian J Dermatol. 2011 Mar; 56(2):165-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2018.09.002 EIS, Electrical impedance spectroscopy. *Total number of clinical decisions made on benign lesions (obtained by multiplying number of survey respondents, 164, by the number of benign lesions in the study, 28). y Total number of clinical decisions made on malignant lesions (obtained by multiplying number of survey respondents, 164, by the number of malignant lesions in the study, 17). z Total number of clinical decisions made on benign and malignant lesions (obtained by multiplying number of survey respondents, 164, by the number of lesions included the study, 45).

Background: Despite the clinical availability and widespread usage of diagnostic and prognostic gene expression profiles (GEP) for the management of melanoma, no recommendations for Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) exist to guide their integration into clinical practice.Objective: To develop a set of consensus-based AUC recommendations for the use of GEP profiling technology in the diagnosis and management of melanoma in specifically-defined situations commonly encountered by the practicing dermatologist.Methods: A systematic Medline literature search was performed to identify all existing evidence pertinent to the clinical efficacy and utility of three melanoma GEP tests that met the inclusion criteria (validated in peer-reviewed literature, US governmentally approved, and currently widely used) for review. A modified Delphi technique was used to achieve consensus and standard SORT criteria were applied. An expert panel of nine dermatologists/dermatologic surgeons/dermatopathologists developed a set of 29 clinical scenarios for the appropriate use of GEP assays and reviewed the available literature to make evidence-based recommendations for each indication.Results: The 2-GEP assay for melanoma diagnosis received 1 B-strength and 6 C-strength recommendations. The 23-GEP diagnostic test received 1 A-strength, 3 B-strength, and 4 C-strength recommendations. The 31-GEP prognostic assay received 1 A-strength, 7 B-strength, and 6 C-strength recommendations.Conclusions: These AUC recommendations provide an evidence-based framework for the integration of melanoma GEP tests into clinical practice.

Background: Insufficient understanding of sunscreen labeling terminology is a bar-

Dermoscopy and patch testing in patients with lichen planus pigmentosus on face: a cross-sectional observational study in fifty Indian patients.

Background Sunscreens, unlike prescription medications, are purchased by consumers directly from retailers. The proportion of online sunscreen sales is increasing. It is therefore important for dermatologists to know what factors influence online sunscreen purchases to optimize appropriate recommendations. Methods Data on the top 100 best‐selling sunscreens from an online retailer were collected. Variables included cost, formulation, product claims, ingredients, consumer ratings, and number of reviews. Ordinal logistic regression was used to analyze the impact of collected variables on position on the best‐seller list. Results Ninety‐six of the 100 search results could be defined as actual sunscreens with a total of 41 788 reviews. The median price per ounce was $3.02 (range $0.34‐$309.18). The most popular formulations were lotions. The most common unregulated claim was “non‐greasy” found in 57.3% of sunscreens. For 26 unregulated product claims analyzed, the mean number of claims per sunscreen was 5.2. Using an ordinal regression model, the following factors were found to significantly influence sunscreen sales: number of reviews, the claim “decreases the risk of skin cancer and early aging,” and the presence of six or more unregulated claims. Conclusions Multiple sunscreen options exist for consumers with varying price points, active ingredients, and formulations. Consumers who purchase online prefer sunscreens with a higher number of reviews and more unregulated marketing claims. FDA‐regulated claims such as “decreases the risk of skin cancer and early aging” are not as impactful in this purchasing cohort. To facilitate usage, dermatologists should be cognizant of factors that influence sunscreen selection among this group.

Despite barriers to educational attainment, low-SES youth often maintain strong academic intentions and performance if they continue to view school as important for obtaining the desired futures they envision for themselves. We undertook three related studies to examine the importance of one aspiration central to the desired futures of many low-SES youth: attaining upward socioeconomic mobility. Cross-sectional, longitudinal (Study 1), and experimental data (Study 2) demonstrate that low-SES youth’s beliefs about their likelihood of attaining mobility affects their likelihood of envisioning futures that hinge on educational attainment, which ultimately predict their academic intentions and performance. Study 3 then tests a novel intervention for promoting the adoption of education-dependent futures among low-SES youth: highlighting multiple viable school-based paths to future mobility.