Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39140486›Full record

ReviewActa dermato-venereologica2024

Fragrance Contact Allergy - A Review Focusing on Patch Testing.

Thanisorn Sukakul, Magnus Bruze, Cecilia Svedman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta dermato-venereologica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Skin examination in extreme conditions.Acta biochimica Polonica · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Thanisorn SukakulDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden. kimthanisornsu@gmail.com.
Magnus BruzeDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
Cecilia SvedmanDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fragrance materials are widely used in various types of products in daily life and many of them can be contact sensitizers. Contact allergy to fragrances has been reported to be common worldwide. Unlike other groups of contact allergens such as metals and preservatives, fragrance materials in consumer products can be present as single fragrance chemicals or in the form of mixtures known as natural complex substances. Due to the complexity of the fragrance materials and the high number of fragrance substances known to cause contact sensitization, selecting suitable materials for patch testing is challenging. Emerging fragrance markers have been additionally introduced in different baseline series for screening to enhance the rate of fragrance contact allergy detection. Moreover, there have been continual updates on basic knowledge, clinical perspectives, sources of exposure, and regulations on the use of fragrance materials. Avoiding pitfalls while performing patch testing with fragrance test materials is also crucial and should not be overlooked. Therefore, this review aims to update knowledge to provide a high-quality holistic approach to fragrance contact allergy diagnosis and management.

Indexed as

AllergensDermatitis, Allergic ContactPatch TestsPerfumeHumansPredictive Value of TestsAllergensPerfume

Identifiers

PMID39140486
PMCPMC11334351

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.