Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Epoxy Resin in Microscopy Immersion Oil: Cases From Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 The product, manufactured by Leica Microsystems (Wetzlar, Germany), since has been withdrawn from sale.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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".