MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

North American Contact Dermatitis Group Patch-Test Results, 2001-2002 Study Period

2004· article· en· W1981217906 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicContact Dermatitis and Allergies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Medical Protective Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePatch testPeriod (music)Patch testingContact dermatitisTest (biology)DermatologyAllergic contact dermatitisGeologyAllergyImmunologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis is a significant cause of cutaneous disease affecting many individuals in the home and at the workplace. Patch testing is the most worthwhile diagnostic tool for the evaluation of patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVE: This study reports the results of patch testing from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2002, by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG). METHODS: Patients were tested with an extended screening series of 65 allergens. A standardized patch-testing technique was used. Data from these patients were recorded on a standardized computer entry form and analyzed. RESULTS: Sixty-five allergens were tested on 4,913 patients. The top 10 allergens remain the same in this study period as in the 1999-2000 study period: nickel sulfate (16.7%), neomycin (11.6%), Myroxilon pereirae (balsam of Peru) (11.6%), fragrance mix (10.4%), thimerosal (10.2%), sodium gold thiosulfate (10.2%), quaternium-15 (9.3%), formaldehyde (8.4%), bacitracin (7.9%), and cobalt chloride (7.4%). Of the 4,913 patients tested, 69% had at least one positive allergic patch-test reaction. Of all patients, 15.8% had occupation-related dermatitis; 15.4% were determined to have irritant contact dermatitis, and 11.1% of the 15.4% had a relevant reaction to an occupational irritant. Of all patients tested, 16.7% had a relevant reaction to an allergen not in the NACDG standard series, and 5.5% had a relevant reaction to an occupational allergen not in the standard series. CONCLUSION: Our findings once again reinforce the need for a more comprehensive group of diagnostic allergens than those found in the standard screening kits. The usefulness of patch testing is enhanced when a greater number of allergens are tested, especially nonstandard allergens occupationally encountered.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · 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