MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049150736 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v7n3p52

The Topical Effect of Grape Seed Extract 2% Cream on Surgery Wound Healing

2014· article· en· W2049150736 on OpenAlex
Ali Asghar Hemmati, Maryam Foroozan, Gholamreza Houshmand, Zahra Moosavi, Mohammad Bahadoram, Nader Shakiba Maram

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAhvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboGrape seed extractWound healingSurgeryClinical trialRandomized controlled trialWound closureAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Reducing the wound healing time is crucial in wound as it lowers the chance of infection and decreases complications and cost. Grape seed extract has the ability to release endothelial growth factor and its topical application results in contraction and closure of the skin wound. Furthermore, it possesses antioxidant and antibacterial properties. In several studies it has been proved effective in animals. Therefore, due to low side effects and recognition of herbal medicine, we decided to evaluate the effect of grape seed extract 2% herbal cream on human skin lesions. MATERIALS: This study is a double blind clinical trial conducted on two groups of treatment and placebo. Surgery was performed on skin lesions such as skin tags and moles which were found on the neck, trunk and limbs (except for face). After enrollment and obtaining informed consent from participants, they were randomized into two groups of treatment and placebo. Excision of the lesions was done by surgical scissors. The lesions got restored by secondary intention method. After the first day of treatment, the patients were visited on the 3rd, 7th, 10th, 14th, and 21st day. Grape seed extract cream 2% was produced and coded by the Faculty of Pharmacy, Ahvaz University of Medical Sciences. In order to compare the two groups, T-test was used. For time assessing, analysis of variance with repeated measures was employed. RESULTS: The results showed complete repair of wounds averagely on day 8 for the treatment group and on day 14 for the placebo group, which was clearly significant in terms of statistical difference (p=0.00). CONCLUSION: Proanthocyanidins in grape seed extract trigger the release of vascular endothelial growth factor and its topical application causes wound contraction and closure. Curing skin lesions with grape seed extract caused proliferation areas with protected boundaries in epithelium, increased cell density and increased deposition of connective tissue at the wound site which in general improves cellular structure in wound. In addition, its anti-inflammatory and anti-microbial properties are effective in wound healing.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.343 · 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