Fraxel Laser Indications and Long-Term Follow-Up
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fractional photothermolysis, based on creating spatially precise microscopic thermal wounds, is performed using a 1550-nm erbium fiber laser that targets water-containing tissue to effect the photocoagulation of narrow, sharply defined columns of skin known as microscopic thermal zones. According to the authors, Fraxel resurfacing has been shown to be both safe and effective for facial and nonfacial photodamage, atrophic acne scars, hypopigmented scars, and dyspigmentation. Because only a fraction of the skin is treated during a single session, a series (typically 3 to 6 treatments) of fractional resurfacing at 2- to 4-week intervals is required for the best clinical improvement. It is the authors' experience that a series of Fraxel treatments can achieve a similar clinical result for atrophic scars compared with traditional ablative laser skin resurfacing. However, the improvement seen after a series of Fraxel treatments for perioral laxity and rhytides often falls short of the impressive results that can be achieved with ablative laser skin resurfacing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it