MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073359266 · doi:10.1053/ac.2000.6342

Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Epoxy Resin in Microscopy Immersion Oil: Cases From Canada

2000· article· en· W2073359266 on OpenAlexaffabout
Denis Sasseville, Linda Moreau, Josée Brassard, Georgette Leclerc

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Contact Dermatitis · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicContact Dermatitis and Allergies
Canadian institutionsCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de ChicoutimiRoyal Victoria Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpoxyContact dermatitisAllergic contact dermatitisEuropean standardDermatologyMaterials scienceMedicineComposite materialAllergy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of epoxy resin in a reformulated immersion oil for microscopy has caused an epidemic of occupational contact dermatitis in laboratory technicians from some European centers. We report 6 additional cases, the mode of presentation of which was similar to the European patients. All patients were patch tested to the undiluted oil, and some were tested to the European or North American standard series and to an extensive series of glues and adhesives allergens. At 96 hours, all 6 patients displayed a strong 2+ to 3+ reaction to the undiluted oil. Two patients were not further tested, but in the remaining 4, positive reactions were seen to epoxy resin from the standard tray. One patient reacted to cycloaliphatic epoxy resin, and 2 displayed positive tests to the reactive diluents phenyl glycidyl ether and cresyl glycidyl ether. These further cases confirm the strong sensitizing properties of this particular immersion oil. The product, manufactured by Leica Microsystems (Wetzlar, Germany), since has been withdrawn from sale.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Contact DermatitisSame topicContact Dermatitis and AllergiesFrench-language works237,207