MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Use of Hyaluronic Acid for Soft Tissue Augmentation of HIV-Associated Facial Lipodystrophy

2006· article· en· W2031795168 on OpenAlexaff
Melinda Gooderham, Nowell Solish

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatologic Surgery · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLipodystrophyMedicineLipoatrophyHyaluronic acidAntiretroviral therapyAdverse effectHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Soft tissueDermatologySurgeryViral loadInternal medicineVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lipodystrophy syndrome is a devastating complication of antiretroviral therapy in individuals with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). The appearance of the associated facial lipoatrophy can be demoralizing and stigmatizing for the affected individuals to a point at which it may compromise their compliance with antiretroviral medication. OBJECTIVE: We describe the use of hyaluronic acid as an intradermal filler for correction of this disfiguring problem. METHODS: We treated five patients with grade 2 to 3 facial lipoatrophy. Each patient received approximately 5 to 6 cc in total of hyaluronic acid in the malar area via intradermal injection. RESULTS: There were no adverse events. We found that this technique provided a good cosmetic result with high patient satisfaction. At 6-month follow-up, sustained longevity was observed. CONCLUSIONS: We propose the use of hyaluronic acid for HIV-associated facial lipoatrophy as an efficacious and safe, but temporary, option for this problem until a more cost-effective option is available.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDermatologic SurgerySame topicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207