Sensitization to Rubber Accelerators in Northeastern Italy: The Triveneto Patch Test Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Natural and synthetic rubbers containing rubber accelerators are well-known causes of occupational skin disease. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by rubber gloves is frequent and has almost exclusively been attributed to contact sensitization to accelerators. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the frequency of rubber accelerators sensitization in the population living in northeastern Italy, to find time trend and a correlation with occupations, and to investigate co-sensitization between rubber accelerators. METHODS: A population of 23,774 subjects was patch tested in 6 cities in northeastern Italy in the years 1996 to 2012 using carba mix 3%, thiuram mix 1%, benzothiazole (MBT) mix 1%, and isopropyl phenyl paraphenylamine diamine (IPPD) mix 0.6%. RESULTS: The overall frequency of carbamates, MBT, thiurams, and IPPD mix sensitization was 3.4%, 0.65%, 1.75%, and 0.83%, respectively. On a logistic regression analysis (control group: white-collar workers), we found a statistically significant association to carbamates (odds ratio [OR], 1.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.7) and thiurams (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3) for health care workers. Thiuram sensitivity was also significantly associated with dermatitis in maids and restaurant workers (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.4-3.6), hairdressers (OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.8-7.1), shop assistants (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.2-6.8), construction workers (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.7-4.1), mechanics (OR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3-3.4), and professional drivers (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-5.9). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, our results demonstrated that rubber accelerators have an important role in allergic contact dermatitis in the northeast of Italy and their sensitization is associated significantly with occupations that wear gloves or use chemical substances. Between rubber accelerators tested, carbamates sensitization is prevalent and increasing during considered years.
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".