Clarification and Modification of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group Classification of Patch Test Reactions on Behalf of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first ICDRG (International Contact Dermatitis Research Group) classification of patch test reactions was published in 1970. With this classification, many weak reactions were classified as allergic reactions. A second classification was therefore implemented one decade later on behalf of the ICDRG and the North American Contact Dermatitis Group. This classification was adopted by the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Evaluation of the significance of the results of various studies on patch test reading demonstrated that a new ICDRG classification of patch test reactions was needed. A classification system should not be based on the exclusive presence/absence of papules and vesicles, i.e., the words "possibly papules/vesicles" allow for the unavoidable variation in reading among experts. Dermatologists are not reading patch test reactions in a uniform way due to lack of a clear definition of the threshold between weak allergic and doubtful reactions. A new ICDRG classification with clarifications and modifications of the old one is presented.
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 | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".