MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135061141 · doi:10.1097/der.0000000000000729

North American Contact Dermatitis Group Patch Test Results: 2017–2018

2021· article· en· W3135061141 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicContact Dermatitis and Allergies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of OttawaMontreal General HospitalUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePatch testAllergenContact dermatitisConfidence intervalAllergic contact dermatitisDermatologyPatch testingAllergyInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Patch testing is an important diagnostic tool for assessment of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). OBJECTIVE: This study documented the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) patch testing results from March 1, 2017, to December 31, 2018. METHODS: At 14 centers in North America, patients with dermatitis were tested in a standardized manner with a screening series of 70 allergens and supplemental allergens as clinically indicated. Data were manually verified and entered into a central database. Descriptive statistics were estimated, and trends were analyzed using χ2 test. RESULTS: Overall, 4947 patients were tested. There were 3235 patients (65.4%) who had at least 1 positive reaction and 2495 patients (50.4%) had a primary diagnosis of ACD. Five hundred eighty-one patients (11.7%) had occupationally related dermatitis. There were 10,122 positive patch test reactions. Nickel remained the most commonly detected allergen (16.2%), followed by methylisothiazolinone 0.2% aqueous (15.3%) and methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone 0.02% aqueous (200 ppm, 11.0%). Compared with the previous reporting periods (2015-2016 and 2007-2016), the proportion of positive reactions for the top 20 screening allergens statistically increased for only 1 allergen, propolis (3.4%; risk ratios = 2.05 [confidence interval = 1.66-2.54] and 1.82 [confidence interval = 1.57-2.11]).Four newly added allergen preparations, hydroperoxides of linalool (8.9%), benzisothiazolinone (7.3%), sodium metabisulfite (2.7%), and hydroperoxides of limonene (2.6%), all had a prevalence of greater than 2%. Approximately 1 (19.7%) in 5 tested patients had 1 or more clinically relevant reactions to an allergen not on the NACDG screening series; 13.2% of these were occupationally related. T.R.U.E. TEST (SmartPractice Denmark, Hillerød, Denmark) would have hypothetically missed 30% to 40% of reactions detected by the NACDG screening series. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the importance of a regularly updated screening allergen series. Methylisothiazolinone continues to be a significant allergen in North America. Patch testing with allergens beyond a screening tray is necessary for complete evaluation of occupational and non-occupational ACD.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it