Nummular Eczema and Contact Allergy: A Retrospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Etiopathogenesis of nummular eczema is obscure; many causative factors have been proposed. Only a few studies investigated the relevance of contact allergy. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study aimed to investigate the role of contact allergy in the underlying mechanism of nummular eczema. METHODS: From the 29,323 consecutive patients, we patch-tested for eczematous dermatitis of various type, 1022 (3.5%) with nummular eczema were enrolled. Data were collected for each patient, including age, sex, occupation, symptoms onset and duration, onset and spread sites, and clinical evidence or history of atopy. Histological analyses of acute phase lesions were carried out in some patients. RESULTS: Peak incidence of age at disease onset was found in the third decade of life. Predominant sites of lesions were upper (75.8%) and lower (64.5%) limbs, followed by trunk, dorsum of the hands, and face and neck. Three hundred thirty-two (32.5%) of 1022 patients showed positive reactions to 1 or more allergens. Highest sensitization rates were found with nickel sulfate (10.2%), potassium dichromate (7.3%), and cobalt chloride (6.1%). Histopathology showed less pronounced spongiosis in atopic subjects and the elderly. CONCLUSIONS: Because this study demonstrates that contact allergy is common with nummular eczema, patch testing is strongly advisable in every patient with persistent nummular dermatitis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".