Patch-Test Reactions to Thioureas Are Frequently Relevant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thioureas are used as antioxidants in the manufacture of rubber (especially neoprene) and as fixatives in photography and photocopy paper. The number of reported cases of allergic contact dermatitis from thioureas is relatively low, and standard patch test series often do not contain thiourea allergens. Thioureas are included in our institution's standard patch test series. OBJECTIVE: To examine the occurrence and relevance of patch-test reactions to thioureas. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patch-test data for patients evaluated between January 1999 and June 2001. Patients included in the study underwent testing with a standard screening series of allergens and a standardized patch testing technique. Our standard patch test series includes mixed dialkyl thioureas at a concentration of 1% in petrolatum. RESULTS: Of 1,368 patients tested with our standard series, 33 patients (2.4%) had patch-test reactions to mixed dialkyl thioureas at day 5. Reactions in 14 (42%) of those patients were of definite clinical relevance, indicating a confirmed exposure to thioureas in many different settings. CONCLUSION: Patch-test reactions to thioureas occur as often as do reactions to many other allergens in the standard series and are often relevant. Institutions should consider including mixed dialkyl thioureas in their standard patch test screening series.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".