MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1587624343 · doi:10.1177/229255031101900108

The New Genetico-Racial Skin Classification: How to Maximize the Safety of Any Peel Or Laser Treatment On Any Asian, Caucasian Or Black Patient

2011· article· en· W1587624343 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plastic Surgery · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSkin Protection and Aging
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityInstitute of Cosmetic and Laser SurgeryUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSophisticationSkin colorDermatologySensibilitySimplicityArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The popular skin classifications, notably the 'Fitzpatrick' and 'Obaji' classifications, are primarily based on skin colour. Other criteria are occasionally considered, such as the degree of skin oiliness, thickness, sensibility, etc. Although these classifications are easy to understand and apply, their simplicity limits their precision, sophistication and applicability.The new genetico-racial skin classification proposed herein suggests that skin response to any peel or laser treatment is genetically programmed and is, therefore, linked to the genetic and racial origin of the patient. In other words, in addition to skin colour, the patient's facial features and ancestry should be taken into account when classifying any skin.The new genetico-racial skin classification enables the physician to determine with great precision, and before any peel or laser treatment, the level of the patient's suitability and the expected postoperative outcomes; therefore, reducing the likelihood of complications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.180 · 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