Influence of papain urea copper chlorophyllin on wound matrix remodeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the dermal and epidermal alterations associated with wound healing in wounds treated with papain urea copper chlorophyllin (PUC), papain-urea, copper chlorophyllin, or urea base ointment and compare these with moist wound care using a porcine full-thickness infected wound model. All the wounds were evaluated postsurgery for erythema, transepidermal water loss, microscopic morphology, and changes in protein expression. Examination of stained paraffin sections revealed an increase in the number of keratinocytes present in the epidermis of the PUC and papain-treated pigs, relative to moist control. This increase in keratinocyte number corresponded to an increase in the movement of the keratinocytes into the underlying dermis in the form of rete pegs. In the dermis, there appeared to be an increase in blood vessel formation, collagen I deposition, and mature collagen in the papain and PUC treated tissues. The quality of healing appears to be enhanced based on the number of keratinocytes present in the epidermis, the extensive rete peg formation, the increase in vasculature, and the increase in collagen birefringence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".