Is Dermatitis Palmaris Sicca an Irritant Contact Dermatitis?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dermatitis palmaris sicca (DPS) is a common dry-fissured palmar dermatitis in Asian women. It may be an irritant contact dermatitis, but the immunophenotype of the cells in its infiltrate is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of inflammatory cells in the pathogenesis of DPS. METHODS: Patch testing was done in 68 patients with DPS, 87 subjects with hand eczema, and 31 healthy subjects. Immunophenotyping of cutaneous inflammatory cells was performed in 8 patients with DPS, 10 subjects with hand eczema, and 8 healthy individuals. RESULTS: Positive patch rates were higher in patients with DPS and those with hand eczema compared with healthy controls, but strong positive (++ or +++) reactions in DPS were fewer compared with hand eczema. Density of CD3, CD4, CD8, and CD68 cells in skin lesions of DPS and hand eczema was significantly higher than that in normal skin. Sparse CD20 cells were present only in hand eczema. Compared with hand eczema, the number of CD3, CD8, CD68, and dermal CD1a cells decreased, but epidermal CD1a cells and CD4/CD8 ratio increased in DPS. CONCLUSIONS: The absolute lack of CD20 cells and relative scarcity of dermal CD8 and CD1a cells in skin lesions might be insufficient to induce contact hypersensitivity, so DPS may be an irritant but not allergic contact 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".