MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980533969 · doi:10.1097/der.0b013e318250b448

The Role of Contact Allergens in Chronic Idiopathic Urticaria

2012· article· en· W1980533969 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Meghan T. Hession, Pamela L. Scheinman

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrticaria and Related Conditions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCobalt chlorideAllergenContact dermatitisDermatologyEtiologyPatch testPotassium dichromateAllergyPatch testingInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine whether contact allergens play a role in chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU). METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal prospective study of 23 patients with CIU. Patients were patch tested to a modified North American Contact Dermatitis Group standard, fragrance, and cosmetic series; other series were tested as warranted by relevant history and physical examination. Readings were performed at 48 and 72 hours. Patients were counseled to avoid proven contact allergens and were followed up 2 to 9 months after testing. RESULTS: Twenty-one of 23 patients were female. The mean age was 46 years. The mean duration of urticaria was 32 months. Of the 23 patients, 8 (35%) experienced improvement of their symptoms with allergen avoidance. Four (17%) experienced a complete remission, and 4 (17%) experienced partial improvement. Two of the complete responders challenged themselves to proven contact allergens and developed urticaria, which resolved upon allergen avoidance. The most common allergens were potassium dichromate (n = 9), nickel sulfate (n = 7), Myroxylon pereirae (n = 6), cobalt chloride, neomycin, p-phenylenediamine (n = 5); fragrance mix I, fragrance mix II (n = 4); cinnamic aldehyde (n = 3); and formaldehyde (n = 2). CONCLUSIONS: Patch testing may be helpful in the evaluation of CIU patients for whom previous workup has failed to reveal an etiology.

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 score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations27
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitisSame topicUrticaria and Related ConditionsFrench-language works237,207