The Clinical Phenotype of Patients with Contact Polysensitization, a Retrospective Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Background: Polysensitization, defined as contact sensitization to three or more allergens, is an allergic phenotype with a common genetic background. Our study aims to characterize the clinical features of patients with polysensitization. Methods: We analyzed patch test results of 5,082 patients from a designated contact dermatitis clinic in Tel Aviv between 2012 and 2022 and compared the polysensitized group with nonsensitized and oligosensitized patients, hence patients reacting to 1 or 2 allergens. Results: About 8.5% of patients were polysensitized. In the nonsensitized group, there were significantly fewer female patients and more children ( P < 0.05) than in the polysensitized group. Asthma prevalence was linearly associated with the number of positive reactions in patch test. Polysensitized patients were more commonly suffering from hand eczema and an occupational etiology ( P < 0.05). Textile dye mix, lyral, fragrance mix II, formaldehyde, colophonium, and p-phenylendiamine were more common sensitizers among the polysensitized group, whereas nickel sulfate, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate, fragrance mix 1, p-tert-butylphenol formaldehyde resin, and sodium metabisulfite were more common among the oligosensitized group. Conclusions: The association between polysensitization, asthma prevalence, and sensitization to volatile allergens raises an intriguing clinical phenotype. Further mechanistic studies are needed in this regard.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".