Evaluation of contact sensitivity in patients with isolated itching of the external auditory canal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study was designed to demonstrate the frequency of sensitivity to European standard patch test allergens in patients with isolated itching of the external auditory canal (EAC). Study Design: A prospective case-control study. Methods: Fifty-six female patients with the complaint of recurrent EAC itching and 30 female controls without pruritis of the ears were patch-tested with 25 allergens of the European standard series. Results: Twenty-four patients (25.5%) had one or more positive patch test reactions. In 21.4% of patients, nickel sulphate was the most frequent sensitizer, but there was no statistically significant difference in the nickel sensitization rate between patients and controls (p > .05). Sensitivity rates were much lower for the other allergens. There was no association between contact sensitivity to fragrances and to preservatives and patients with pruritis of the ears. Conclusion: Our results do not demonstrate that most patients with pruritic ears probably suffer from allergic contact dermatitis. © 2011 The Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".