Workplace screening for hand dermatitis: a pilot study: Table 1.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health care workers (HCWs) are at increased risk for developing occupational skin disease (OSD) such as dermatitis primarily due to exposure to wet work. Identification of risk factors and workplace screening can help early detection of OSD to avoid the condition becoming chronic. AIMS: To determine risk factors and clinical findings for hand dermatitis using a workplace screening tool. METHODS: Employees at a large teaching hospital in Toronto, Canada, were invited to complete a two-part hand dermatitis screening tool. Part 1 inquired about hand hygiene practices and Part 2 comprised a visual assessment of participants' hands by a health professional and classification as (i) normal, (ii) mild dermatitis or (iii) moderate/severe dermatitis. Risk factors were determined using chi-square and Cochran-Armitage analysis on a dichotomous variable, where Yes represented either a mild or moderate/severe disease classification. RESULTS: There were 183 participants out of 643 eligible employees; response rate 28%. Mild or moderate/severe dermatitis was present in 72% of participants. These employees were more likely to work directly with patients, have worked longer in a health care setting, wash hands and change gloves more frequently, wear gloves for more hours per day, have a history of eczema or dermatitis and report a current rash on the hands or rash in the past 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: There was a high percentage of HCWs with dermatitis and risk factors for dermatitis. These findings argue for increased attention to prevention and early identification of hand dermatitis and support further testing of the workplace screening tool.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it