A Cross‐Sectional Study of Contact Allergens in Hotel Personal Care Products in Canada, the United States and Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Personal care products (PCPs), such as shampoos, conditioners and body washes, can contain ingredients that may cause allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Hotels commonly offer complimentary toiletries; however, there is limited data regarding the allergen content of these products. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify allergens within PCPs that may cause ACD in hotels across Canada, the United States (US) and Europe. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted to identify American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) core allergens listed in the ingredients of PCPs sampled from 90 hotels across Canada, the US and Europe. Hotels were stratified equally into luxury, mid-scale and budget-friendly categories. RESULTS: Methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) was found in 4.4% of hotel products in Europe, which is significantly lower than its prevalence in Canada (47.8%) and the US (40.0%) (p < 0.0001). In Canada and the US, DMDM hydantoin, a formaldehyde-releasing preservative, was detected in approximately one in seven products but was absent in the toiletries from European hotels (Canada vs. Europe: p = 0.01; US vs. Europe: p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: A higher percentage of multiple ACDS core allergens were identified in complimentary hotel toiletries in Canada and the US than in Europe. This study underscores the importance of patient and clinician awareness of the potential risk of ACD resulting from exposure to hotel products.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".