Patch testing with sodium disulfite: North American Contact Dermatitis Group experience, 2017 to 2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sodium disulfite (SD), also known as sodium metabisulfite, is an increasingly recognized cause of allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this work was to characterize individuals with positive patch test reactions to SD as well as analyse reaction strength, clinical relevance, and sources. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of patients patch tested with SD (1% petrolatum) by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG), 2017 to 2018. RESULTS: Of 4885 patients patch tested with SD, 132 (2.7%) had a positive reaction. Common primary anatomic sites of dermatitis were face (28.8%), hands (20.5%), and a scattered/generalized distribution (13.6%). Compared with SD-negative patients, SD-positive patients were more likely male (odds ratio 2.81, 95% confidence interval 1.98-4.00) and/or over 40 years (odds ratio 1.95, 95% confidence interval 1.30-2.94). Reactions were most commonly + (50.4%) or ++ (34.1%); 65.2% were considered currently relevant. About 15.2% were definitively confirmed in sources, commonly personal care products (18.9%, especially hair dye), and drugs/medications/alcoholic beverages (9.1%). Only 2.3% of positive reactions were linked to occupation. CONCLUSIONS: Positive reactions to SD occurred in 2.7% of tested patients. Reactions were often clinically relevant and linked to personal care products and drugs/medications/alcoholic beverages.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".