Occupational Contact Dermatitis from a Grease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Contact allergy to grease is rare and often not even suspected. We investigated such a case in which the detected allergen was the stabilizer in the grease, which is rarely found as an allergen. OBJECTIVE: Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) was used in a novel way and helped detect the allergen. METHODS: Patch testing with our standard series, a metal-working series, the different substances individually, the grease in serial dilution and extracts of personal objects, the TLC plate. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry was also used. RESULTS: Test results indicated contact allergy to grease containing N-phenyl-1-naphthylamine and contact allergy to Disperse Orange 1, N-cyclohexyl-N'-phenyl-4-phenylenediamine, N-isopropyl-N'-phenyl-4-phenylenediamine, and N,N'-diphenyl-4-phenylenediamine. CONCLUSION: N-phenyl-1-naphthylamine was the main cause of the patient's dermatitis. This case report underlines the importance of testing the patient's own products and also underlines the benefit of using TLC strips for patch testing and of visiting the workplace to get correct information about exposure conditions.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".