A 10-Year Retrospective Study on Palladium Sensitivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Palladium has become an important contact allergen because of increased use in industry, jewelry, and dentistry. OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of palladium allergy in a US patch-test population tested to palladium. METHODS: A 10-year retrospective review (1997-2006) was performed on patients sensitive to palladium at the Department of Dermatology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. RESULTS: A total of 910 patients were tested to a series that included palladium chloride 2% in petrolatum. A palladium-positive patch-test result was noted in 110 patients (12.1%). Of the 106 patients sensitized to palladium who had records available for review, 15.1% had a diagnosis of lichen planus-like eruptions; 13.2%, burning mouth; 27.4%, stomatitis; and 29.2%, hand and body dermatitis. CONCLUSION: Palladium sensitivity is more common in oral diseases than in skin. We describe a previously unknown high degree of co-reactivity of gold with palladium to the same degree as the known co-reactivity with nickel.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".