MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316046527 · doi:10.1097/der.0b013e318262ca83

Nail Injury and Diquat Exposure: Forgotten But Not Gone

2012· article· en· W2316046527 on OpenAlex
Thomas Kibby, Daniel S. Ring

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParaquat toxicity studies and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiquatNail (fastener)MedicineOccupational exposureNail plateDermatologyToxicologyParaquatDentistryEnvironmental healthParonychiaEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary fingernail changes that result from chemical exposures are seldom encountered in clinical practice. A cluster investigation was conducted on employees at a pesticide packaging company. Six employees reported simultaneous onset of defects occurring in their fingernails, including nail discoloration, nail dimpling, and nail shedding. Multiple pesticides and herbicides including diquat were used in the facility at the time of the cluster onset. A literature review noted 6 articles published before 1975 documenting similar nail changes associated with paraquat, diquat, or other herbicide use. Only one such case report published after 1985 could be located. Diquat was the only material that was previously reported in the medical literature as causing nail defects and also in use at this facility. Diquat exposure is the most plausible explanation for the observed changes in these workers' fingernails.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.254 · 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