Laser-Assisted Penetration of Allergens for Patch Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patch-test patients often complain of itching and inconvenience. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate (1) the usefulness of laser-assisted alteration of the stratum corneum to enhance allergen delivery and (2) patient satisfaction with this procedure. METHODS: The LAD-01 (erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet) laser unit was used to alter stratum corneum from patients with known sensitivity to nickel or Kathon CG. These allergens were then applied to the laser-pretreated sites for 60 minutes. Results were observed at 24, 48, and 96 hours and at 1 week. One patient who refused conventional patch testing was tested with an entire modified North American standard series tray with the laser patch-test technique. An additional patient with previously demonstrated positive atopy patch-test reactions to environmental organisms was retested with laser pretreatment to the same antigens. RESULTS: Three of three patients known to be sensitive to Kathon CG and eight of eleven known nickel-sensitive patients had positive reactions at the laser-pretreated sites. The patient who was tested with the entire standard series demonstrated relevant positive reactions to formaldehyde and to a textile resin. One subject with known reactions to three environmental organisms reproduced patch-test responses with laser pretreatment. No irritant reactions were noted. Patients reported no pain. CONCLUSION: With further modification, laser pretreatment may improve patient convenience and decrease irritant test reactions owing to occlusion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".