The Changing Spectrum of Pediatric Allergic Contact Dermatitis: A Prospective Multicentric Study in Spain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Background: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is increasingly common in children, with age-related variations suggesting changing exposure patterns. Objective: Updating clinical and epidemiological characteristics, sensitization frequency, and relevance of positive patch tests in pediatric patients. Methods: This prospective multicenter study analyzed data from the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Research Group registry (REIDAC) for patients aged 0–16 years, stratified into 2 groups: 0–5 and 6–16 years. Participants were patch tested with the GEIDAC baseline and extended series from January 2019 to December 2023. Results: Patch tests were performed on 508 children, of whom 179 (35.2%) were sensitized. Among children aged 0–5 years (n = 41), 10 (24.4%) had positive patch tests, with lesions predominantly affecting the face (51.2%), hands (17.0%), and legs (4.9%). Atopic dermatitis (AD) was present in 36.6%, with linalool and limonene hydroperoxides as top sensitizers. In the 6–16 years group (n = 467), 169 patients (36.2%) were sensitized. AD was present in 45.0%, with lesions involving the face (24.0%), hands (23%), and legs (7.0%). Top allergens were linalool hydroperoxide and methylisothiazolinone. Conclusions: High sensitization proportions in both age groups highlight the importance of patch testing. Hydroperoxides of linalool and limonene are emerging as key sensitizers. Age-specific considerations may improve pediatric ACD management.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".