Methylphenidate Patch-Test Protocol and Irritancy Threshold Determination in Healthy Adult Subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The methylphenidate transdermal system (MTS) (Daytrana [Shire Pharmaceuticals Ireland Ltd., Wayne, PA]) has been shown to be well tolerated and effective; however, skin reactions, typically redness and itching, have also been noted with MTS use. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the irritancy threshold of methylphenidate (MPH), the active ingredient in the MTS, in healthy adults for use in subsequent patch testing. METHODS: This was an open-label single-site pilot study. Eligible subjects had MPH (six different concentrations in two vehicles) patch tests applied to the paraspinous region of the upper back. Subjects returned after 48 hours and 96 hours for investigator assessments of each reaction. RESULTS: All enrolled subjects (n = 20) completed the study. There were no definite positive reactions in any subject at any test concentration. Overall, doubtful (macular erythema) reactions were noted on 12 sites at the 48-hour reading and on 6 sites at the 96-hour reading. With both aqueous and petrolatum vehicles, more doubtful reactions were noted at the lower MPH test concentrations. CONCLUSION: When performing patch testing to confirm possible allergic contact dermatitis from topical MPH, several test concentrations in the low-to-middle range (such as 0.1%, 1%, and 10%) prepared in petrolatum are advisable.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".