MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381329592 · doi:10.1089/derm.2023.0045

Potential for Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Popular Hair Care Practices and Ingredients

2023· review· en· W4381329592 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria Karim, Elizabeth J. Klein, Ambika Nohria, Dolly Taiwo, Prince Adotama, David Cohen, Jerry Shapiro, Emily C. Milam, Kristen Lo Sicco

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicContact Dermatitis and Allergies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDermatologyAllergic contact dermatitisScalpSkin carePreservativeContact dermatitisCosmeticsHair careAllergenPersonal careAllergyFood scienceNursingImmunologyPolymer scienceMaterials sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The incidence of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) due to personal care products is rising in parallel with increasing product availability and consumer interest. Hair products specifically represent a significant source of potential allergens, including preservatives, surfactants, emulsifiers, fragrances, adhesives, and dyes. ACD due to hair care products can present as dermatitis in the distinctive "rinse-off" distribution, involving the neck, eyelids, and lateral face in addition to the scalp. Herein, the authors review ingredients in hair care products that can cause ACD and practical tips for allergen identification.

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 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)0.000
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitisSame topicContact Dermatitis and AllergiesFrench-language works237,207