Nickel and Cobalt Release From Children’s Toys Purchased in Denmark and the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nickel is the most common allergen detected by patch testing in children. There is an increasing number of cases in children who have not had exposure to piercing. Although the clinical relevance of nickel patch test reactions in children is sometimes uncertain, continued vigilance to identify new sources of nickel exposure in this age group is important. Recent case reports have described allergic nickel contact dermatitis in children following exposure to toys, but the magnitude of this problem is unknown. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate nickel and cobalt release from children's toys. METHODS: We purchased 212 toys in 18 different retail and online stores in the United States and Denmark. Nickel and cobalt release was tested using the dimethylglyoxime and cobalt screening spot tests. RESULTS: A total of 73 toys (34.4%) released nickel, and none released cobalt. CONCLUSIONS: Toys are a commonly overlooked source of nickel exposure and sensitization. Therefore, dermatologists, allergists, and pediatricians should consider the role of toys in their evaluation of children with dermatitis, and the parents of children with positive nickel patch test reactions should be told that toys may release nickel and be a potential chemical source in the manifestation of allergic contact dermatitis.
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".