Patch-Testing with Plastics and Glues Series Allergens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few US studies have reported results of patch testing with plastics and glues. OBJECTIVE: To report our institution's results of testing patients suspected of allergy to plastics and glues with a comprehensive plastics and glues series and to compare these results with previously published data. METHODS: Retrospective review of results of patch-testing with plastics and glues allergens at our institution between 2000 and 2007. In total, 444 patients were patch-tested with up to 56 plastics and glues allergens in the specialized series and up to five plastics and glues allergens in a baseline series. Positive-reaction rates were compared to other patch testing reports. RESULTS: Of patients, 97 (22%) had irritant reactions, and 201 (45%) had at least one allergic reaction. Bis(2-dimethylaminoethyl) ether 1%, benzoyl peroxide 1%, epoxy resin, bisphenol F 0.25%, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate 2%, and 2-hydroxyethyl acrylate 0.1% had the highest allergy reaction rates. Testing with specialized series identified 193 patients with plastics and glues allergy, of whom 162 were not identified by testing with baseline series alone. CONCLUSION: For patients suspected of allergy to plastics and glues, patch-testing with specialized series of plastics and glues allergens is an important adjunct to patch-testing with baseline series.
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".