Recognizing and Treating Toilet-Seat Contact Dermatitis in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Toilet-seat contact dermatitis is a common condition around the world and is reemerging in the United States. It can be easily recognized and treated. However, few practitioners consider this diagnosis, which results in a delay in treatment and often exacerbation of the skin eruption. In the past, exposure to wooden toilet seats and associated varnish, lacquers, and paints led to the development of an allergic contact dermatitis on the buttocks and posterior thighs. In recent years, most public facilities have changed to plastic seats, resulting in a change in the clinical presentation of toilet-seat dermatitis. We present 5 cases of toilet-seat dermatitis in children from the United States and India and review the history, presentation, and clinical course of the disease. Our findings suggest that toilet-seat dermatitis is more common than previously recognized and should be considered in any child with a dermatitis that involves the buttocks and posterior thighs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".