Impact of glove occlusion on cumulative skin irritation with or without hand cleanser–comparison in an experimental repeated irritation model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Irritant contact dermatitis remains a substantial problem in the food processing industries. Irritants that are weak by themselves, such as glove occlusion and mild detergents, could interact to produce contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVES: To model the irritant action of an antibacterial hand cleanser and glove occlusion, with sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) as a positive control. The effects of a pre-exposure cream and a post-exposure cream were also investigated. METHODS: A modified repeated short-time occlusive irritation test with 20 healthy volunteers, and application of irritants over 4 days, with pre-exposure and post-exposure creams and overnight glove occlusion, was performed. The changes in transepidermal water loss (TEWL) served as a measure of the irritant damage to the epidermal barrier. RESULTS: The antibacterial cleanser and the glove occlusion separately induced only minor increases in TEWL. When combined, the two showed a tandem effect, as the TEWL increase was significantly higher, and was similar to that seen with the positive control, SLS. The pre-exposure and post-exposure creams alone significantly mitigated the cumulative irritation, and this effect was strongest when the two creams were combined. CONCLUSIONS: Irritant contact dermatitis may develop through the tandem effects of long-term glove occlusion and the accumulation of barrier damage from hand washing, even when mild hand cleansers are employed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".