MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023976182 · doi:10.1117/12.432478

<title>Near-infrared spectroscopic approach to assess tissue viability following a thermal injury</title>

2001· article· en· W2023976182 on OpenAlexaff
Lorenzo Leonardi, Michael G. Sowa, Jeri R. Payette, Mark Hewko, Bernhard J. Schattka, Anna Matas, Henry H. Mantsch

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfrared Thermography in Medicine
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDermisBurn injuryThermal burnInfraredBiomedical engineeringBlood supplyNear-infrared spectroscopyPerfusionHemodynamicsMaterials scienceOptical imagingMedicinePathologySurgeryRadiologyAnesthesiaOpticsBiologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recurrent problem in the assessment of thermal injuries is the ability to accurately identify the depth and extent of injury. Generally, the depth of a burn injury determines and is inversely related to the ability of the skin to restore and regenerate itself. Burns involve damage to the dermis in varying amounts, reducing the dermal blood supply and altering the skin hemodynamics. Near infrared spectroscopic imaging was used to non-invasively assess the changes that occur in the early (1-3 h) post-burn period. The study used an accurate porcine model to investigate the potential of near infrared spectroscopic imaging to accurately distinguish between burns of varying severity. Data analysis was carried out using a two-way and three-way data decompositions techniques to investigate the spectral changes related to burns. Burn injuries drastically alter the physical and optical properties of the tissue. Thermal destruction of cutaneous vasculature disrupts perfusion and oxygen delivery to the affected tissue. The results demonstrated that near infrared spectroscopic imaging might provide a new tool for an objective clinical assessment of burn injuries.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.893

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicInfrared Thermography in MedicineFrench-language works237,207