Decreasing Rates of Neomycin Sensitization in Western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neomycin contact sensitization rates in North America range from 7% to 13%, whereas in Europe they average approximately 1.9%. OBJECTIVES: Given that topical neomycin products are no longer readily available in Canada, the aim of this study was to examine what influence this may have had on neomycin sensitization rates in the 3 western provinces. METHODS: On the basis of an observation originally communicated by L. M. Parsons and C. Zhang of the University of Calgary, which suggested significantly reduced rates of neomycin sensitization in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, a multicenter study of patch test results from 5690 patient charts was undertaken. Data from 3 other western Canadian Universities (the University of Saskatchewan, the University of Alberta, and the University of British Colombia) were analyzed. Data were available from 2001 to 2013 for the University of Saskatchewan (except 2006), whereas the University of Alberta and the University of British Columbia had data from 2009 to 2013. Descriptive statistics, trend analysis, and risk estimates were determined using SPSS version 20. RESULTS: Sensitization rates for neomycin have decreased in western Canada and are now similar to those of Europe. CONCLUSIONS: This trend is likely influenced by the reduced availability of over-the-counter and prescription neomycin products in Canada.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".