Early Postoperative Treatment of Thyroidectomy Scars Using a Fractional Carbon Dioxide Laser
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ablative carbon dioxide fractional laser systems (CO(2) FS) have been effectively used to improve the appearance of scarring after surgical procedures, but an optimal treatment time has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of CO(2) FS in early postoperative thyroidectomy scars. METHODS: Twenty-three Korean women with thyroidectomy scars were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent a single session of two passes of a CO(2) FS with a pulse energy setting of 50 mJ and a density of 100 spots/cm(2) 2 to 3 weeks after surgery. RESULTS: Mean Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores were statistically significantly lower after laser treatment. Three months after CO(2) FS treatment of thyroidectomy scarring, 12 of 23 participants showed clinical improvement of more than 51% from 2 to 3 weeks after surgery. The mean grade of clinical improvement based on independent clinical assessment was 2.6 ± 0.9. CONCLUSION: Early postoperative CO(2) FS treatment of thyroidectomy scars is effective and safe.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".