MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041612765 · doi:10.1117/1.2362722

Classification of burn injuries using near-infrared spectroscopy

2006· article· en· W2041612765 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomedical Optics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicForensic Entomology and Diptera Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreNational Research Council CanadaNational Research Council Institute for Biodiagnostics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPartial least squares regressionBurn woundMedicineSurgeryComputer scienceMachine learningWound healing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early surgical management of those burn injuries that will not heal spontaneously is critical. The decision to excise and graft is based on a visual assessment that is often inaccurate but yet continues to be the primary means of grading the injury. Superficial and intermediate partial-thickness injuries generally heal with appropriate wound care while deep partial- and full-thickness injuries generally require surgery. This study explores the possibility of using near-infrared spectroscopy to provide an objective and accurate means of distinguishing shallow injuries from deeper burns that require surgery. Twenty burn injuries are studied in five animals, with burns covering <1% of the total body surface area. Carefully controlled superficial, intermediate, and deep partial-thickness injuries as well as full-thickness injuries could be studied with this model. Near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy was used to evaluate these injuries 1 to 3 hours after the insult. A probabilistic model employing partial least-squares logistic regression was used to determine the degree of injury, shallow (superficial or intermediate partial) from deep (deep partial and full thickness), based on the reflectance spectrum of the wound. A leave-animal-out cross-validation strategy was used to test the predictive ability of a 2-latent variable, partial least-squares logistic regression model to distinguish deep burn injuries from shallow injuries. The model displayed reasonable ranking quality as summarized by the area under the receiver operator characteristics curve, AUC = 0.879. Fixing the threshold for the class boundaries at 0.5 probability, the model sensitivity (true positive fraction) to separate deep from shallow burns was 0.90, while model specificity (true negative fraction) was 0.83. Using an acute porcine model of thermal burn injuries, the potential of near-infrared spectroscopy to distinguish between shallow healing burns and deeper burn injuries was demonstrated. While these results should be considered as preliminary and require clinical validation, a probabilistic model capable of differentiating these classes of burns would be a significant aid to the burn specialist.

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)0.000
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 score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.245 · 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