Contact Allergens in Persons With Leg Ulcers: A Canadian Study in Contact Sensitization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with chronic leg ulcers often develop contact allergic reactions to topical preparations used to treat their wounds and the surrounding skin. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of positive patch test responses to common allergens in patients with leg ulcers or venous disease. A case series of 100 consecutive, consenting patients with chronic venous disease and other causes of leg ulcers that were available for patch testing were enrolled. The patients were tested with 38 common allergens, including those most relevant to leg ulcers. A total of 46% of the patients had at least 1 positive patch test response. Multiple reactions in the same patient were common. The most frequent groups of sensitizers were fragrances, lanolin, antibacterial agents, and rubber-related allergens. Though the prevalence of positive patch test reactions is high in this population, it is lower than commonly reported. This may be the result of clinical practice that considered the avoidance of common sensitizers in the management of patients with leg ulcers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".