MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1561558692 · doi:10.1002/lsm.22314

Early postoperative single treatment ablative fractional lasing of Mohs micrographic surgery facial scars: A split‐scar, evaluator‐blinded study

2015· article· en· W1561558692 on OpenAlex
Joseph F. Sobanko, Vasanop Vachiramon, Pinyo Rattanaumpawan, Christopher J. Miller

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLasers in Surgery and Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScarsSurgeryAblative caseMohs surgerySignificant differenceRadiation therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Despite precise surgical technique, some postoperative facial scars will depress and widen over time, likely due to weakened or inadequately replaced collagen fibers in the underlying dermis. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether a 10,600 nm ablative carbon dioxide (CO2 ) fractional laser used early in the post-surgical setting results in improved postoperative facial scars after a single treatment session. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective randomized, comparative split-scar study was conducted on 20 subjects between the ages of 20-90. Subjects underwent Mohs surgery for nonmelanoma skin cancer of the face. Subsequent to tumor removal, subjects with a linear scar of 4 cm or greater were enrolled. On the day of suture removal, all subjects had one-half of their scar randomly selected and treated with a 10,600 nm CO2 fractional laser (energy = 10 mJ; density = 10%; spot size = 7 mm; pulse = 1). The untreated scar half served as a control. Scars were re-evaluated 12 weeks later. An independent blinded observer graded the scar halves with the Vancouver scar scale (VSS) immediately prior to treatment and 12 weeks after treatment. Subjects completed a visual analog scale (VAS) at the same time points. RESULTS: Three months after laser treatment, a significant decrease in VSS and 3 of the 4 of its individual parameters were detected in both control and treated halves of the scar. When comparing the laser group versus the control group, a statistically significant difference was not noted in VSS (P = 0.31) but a statistically significant difference in patient VAS was detected (P = 0.002). No side effects of the laser treatment were noted. CONCLUSION: Facial wounds sutured in a layered manner heal well. Patients prefer early fractional CO2 lasing of surgical scars, though use of the VSS failed to detect an objective difference between laser and control halves of scars. Conservative laser settings, a single session treatment, and VSS insensitivity for surgical scars may influence these findings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.229 · 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