Positive Patch Test Reactions to Carba Mix and Thiuram Mix: The North American Contact Dermatitis Group Experience (1994–2016)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: This study characterizes concomitant reactions to carba mix (CM) and thiuram mix (TM) in a large North American population. Because thiurams and dithiocarbamates have structural similarity, concomitant reactions are expected. METHODS: The 1994-2016 North American Contact Dermatitis Group data were analyzed. Patients with a final reaction interpreted as "allergic" to either CM or TM were included. RESULTS: A total of 49,758 patients were tested to both CM and TM. A total of 3437 (6.9%) had positive reactions to CM and/or TM including the following groups: CM+ only (n = 1403, 40.8%), TM+ only (n = 1068, 31.0%), or both (n = 966, 28.1%). A total of 47.5% of TM+ patients were positive to CM and 40.8% of CM+ patients were positive to TM. Male sex, occupationally related dermatitis, and hand involvement were significantly more common in individuals positive to CM and/or TM as compared with those who were negative (P < 0.0001). More than 80% of CM+/TM+ reactions were currently relevant. Gloves were the most common source of CM and TM; clothing and footwear were also frequent. CONCLUSIONS: Carba mix and TM remain important, clinically relevant allergens. Although significant concomitant reaction frequency was demonstrated, more than half of the patients reacting to either CM or TM would have been missed if both had not been tested, underscoring the importance of testing to both.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".