Clinical Profile and Allergens in Pigmented Cosmetic Dermatitis and Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Cosmetics in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pigmented cosmetic dermatitis (PCD) is frequently encountered in dark-skinned individuals as gradual hyperpigmentation on the face without preceding erythema or itching. Little is known about the allergen profile in PCD. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to describe the clinical profile and common allergens in PCD and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to cosmetics in Delhi. METHODS: Records of patients suspected of PCD and ACD to cosmetics were analyzed. All patients were patch tested with the Indian standard series, Indian cosmetic and fragrance series, and personal cosmetics and, in relevant cases, hairdresser series. RESULTS: One hundred six patients were analyzed. Patch test was positive in 77 cases (72.6%). Cetrimonium, gallate mix, thiomerosal, and skin lightening creams were more frequently positive in cases of PCD (P = 0.019-0.003), whereas p-phenylenediamine, toluene-2,5 diamine sulfate, p-aminophenol, m-aminophenol, and nitro-p-phenylenediamine were predominantly positive in ACD to cosmetics (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Preservatives, antioxidants, and skin lightening creams seem to play a role in causation of PCD, whereas hair dye allergens cause ACD to cosmetics in India.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".