Occupationally Related Contact Dermatitis in North American Food Service Workers Referred for Patch Testing, 1994 to 2010
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Contact dermatoses are common in food service workers (FSWs). OBJECTIVES: This study aims to (1) determine the prevalence of occupationally related contact dermatitis among FSWs patch tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) and (2) characterize responsible allergens and irritants as well as sources. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of patients patch tested by the NACDG, 1994 to 2010, was conducted. RESULTS: Of 35,872 patients patch tested, 1237 (3.4%) were FSWs. Occupationally related skin disease was significantly more common in FSWs when compared with employed non-FSWs. Food service workers were significantly more likely to have hand (P < 0.0001) and arm (P < 0.0006) involvement. The rates for irritant and allergic contact dermatitis in FSWs were 30.6% and 54.7%, respectively. Although the final diagnosis of irritant contact dermatitis was statistically higher in FSWs as compared with non-FSWs, allergic contact dermatitis was lower in FSWs as compared with non-FSWs. The most frequent currently relevant and occupationally related allergens were thiuram mix (32.5%) and carba mix (28.9%). Gloves were the most common source of responsible allergens. The NACDG standard tray missed at least 1 occupationally related allergen in 38 patients (4.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Among FSWs patch tested by the NACDG between 1994 and 2010, the most common allergens were thiuram mix and carba mix. Gloves were the most common source of responsible allergens.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".