MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Excited Skin Syndrome: Study of 39 Patients

2002· article· en· W4235433814 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ida Duarte, Rosana Lazzarini, Roberta Bedrikow

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicContact Dermatitis and Allergies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePatch testThimerosalDermatologyAllergic contact dermatitisContact dermatitisTest (biology)SurgeryAllergyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Excited skin syndrome (ESS) is an adverse reaction obtained when carrying out epicutaneous patch tests, characterized by multiple positive test results, associated with one or more strongly positive tests, which are not all reproduced when the patient is tested afterward. Objective: The aim of this study was (1) to determine the frequency of ESS in patients submitted to patch testing, (2) to confirm the influence of the evolution time of the primary dermatosis with ESS induction, (3) to determine differences among patients according the rate of positive test loss, and (4) to compare the number of positive tests for each substance between the first test, when all allergens in the test battery were applied, and the second test, when only the allergens with positive tests on the first occasion were applied at a greater distance from one another. Methods: Epicutaneous tests were carried out in 630 patients with a suspected diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. Patients presenting 2 or more positive test results were considered to have ESS and were submitted to a second patch test. Results and Conclusions: ESS developed in 39 of the 630 patients tested, corresponding to a frequency of 6.2%. Analysis of data found a longer duration of the primary dermatitis in patients who in whom ESS developed compared with those who did not. Parabens, fragrance mix, and thimerosal had more positive patch test reactions using standard application techniques relative to the retest procedure, which placed the substances at a greater distance from one another, suggesting that, in addition to the factors previously reported to influence the reduction of ESS, the position of the allergens in the testing procedure also should be considered.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitis→Same topicContact Dermatitis and Allergies→French-language works237,207→