North American Contact Dermatitis Group Patch-Test Results, 2003-2004 Study Period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Allergic contact dermatitis is a significant cause of both occupational and non-occupational skin disease. Patch testing is an important diagnostic tool for the determination of responsible allergens. OBJECTIVE: This study reports the results of patch testing by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2004. METHODS: At 13 centers in North America, patients were tested with the same screening series of 65 allergens, with a standardized patch-testing technique. Data were recorded on standardized forms and manually verified and entered. Descriptive frequencies were calculated, and trends were analyzed with chi-square statistics. RESULTS: A total of 5,148 patients were tested. Of these, 3,432 (66.7%) had at least one positive reaction, 2,284 (44.4%) were ultimately determined to have primary allergic contact dermatitis, and 676 (13.1%) had occupation-related skin disease. There were 9,762 positive allergic reactions. Compared to the previous reporting period (2001-2002), allergies to nickel, budesonide, mercaptobenzothiazole, and paraben mix were at least 1.12 times more common (all p values < .03). Compared with the previous 8 years (1994-2002), only the prevalence rates of allergies to nickel and budesonide were statistically significantly higher (p values < .003). CONCLUSION: Allergic contact dermatitis from nickel and budesonide may be increasing in North America. These results again underscore the value of patch-testing with many allergens.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".