MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W69296660 · doi:10.2310/6620.2010.10008

Eosinophilic Cellulitis and Panniculitis with Generalized Vesicular Pustular Id Reaction after a Molten Aluminum Burn

2010· article· en· W69296660 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sheau‐Chiou Chao, Yi-Pei Lee, Julia Yu‐Yun Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatitis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOccupational and environmental lung diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanniculitisMedicineDermatologyCellulitisAllergyEosinophilicSensitizationRashPathologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypersensitivity reactions to aluminum are rare. Sensitization has been reported during the continuous application of aluminum-containing antiperspirants or after the injection of aluminum-adsorbed vaccines and allergen extracts containing aluminum. We report a rare case of a nonhealing ulcer at the site of an accidental molten aluminum burn that showed changes of eosinophilic cellulitis and panniculitis histologically. This process was followed by a generalized vesicular and pustular id reaction. The reactions resolved after 1 month of systemic corticosteroid therapy. Two months later, there was a relapse with bullae over the burn scar, accompanied by a pruritic oozing rash on the ears and face; the lesions were controlled again with systemic corticosteroid treatment. The clinicopathologic features suggest that the eosinophilic cellulitis with panniculitis and id reaction in the present case represents an unusual allergic reaction to aluminum. Aluminum allergy may be considered as a possible underlying process in the setting of eosinophilic cellulitis with panniculitis and id reaction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatitisSame topicOccupational and environmental lung diseasesFrench-language works237,207