Colophony in Dentistry: Routes of Exposure and Reported Reactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Colophony is a solid form of resin derived from coniferous trees that has both adhesive and water-resistant properties. For these reasons, this allergen is incorporated into many personal care products, medications, and occupational materials, and is thus commonly implicated in allergic contact dermatitis. Dedicated "dental" allergen series often include colophony, but dermatologists are likely not well-versed on its use in a dental setting. There are several routes of exposure to colophony via dental materials, including periodontal dressings, cements, and varnishes. Contact with these products by an individual with a colophony allergy has the potential to produce oral reactions, but cases in the literature are sparse, with almost no publications on this topic in the past decade. This article reviews the existing cases of oral reactions to colophony and discusses their relevance in medical practice. The most common oral reaction identified was allergic contact stomatitis arising after dental interventions in which colophony-containing dressings or fluoride varnishes were used. Cases of allergic contact cheilitis, oral lichen planus, and systemic contact dermatitis have also been described. Both dentists and dermatologists should be aware of colophony's ability to produce allergic contact reactions, especially in the form of stomatitis or cheilitis. For known colophony-allergic patients, dermatologists should provide counseling regarding potential exposure in dental materials and procedures.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".