Effect of Electrical Stimulation on Chronic Leg Ulcer Size and Appearance
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
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Electrical current has been recommended for use on chronic pressure ulcers; however, the ability of this modality to improve healing of other types of chronic ulcers is less well established. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of high-voltage pulsed current (HVPC) on healing of chronic leg ulcers. SUBJECTS: Twenty-seven people with 42 chronic leg ulcers participated in the study. METHODS: The subjects were separated into subgroups according to primary etiology of the wound (diabetes, arterial insufficiency, venous insufficiency) and then randomly assigned to receive either HVPC (100 microseconds, 150 V, 100 Hz) or a sham treatment for 45 minutes, 3 times weekly, for 4 weeks. Wound surface area and wound appearance were assessed during an initial examination, following a 1- to 2-week period during which subjects received only conventional wound therapy, after 4 weeks of sham or HVPC treatment, and at 1 month following treatments. RESULTS: The results indicated that HVPC applied to chronic leg ulcers reduced the wound surface area over the 4-week treatment period to approximately one half the initial wound size (mean decrease=44.3%, SD=8.8%, range=2.8%-100%), which was over 2 times greater than that observed in wounds treated with sham units (mean decrease=16.0%, SD=8.9%, range=-30.3%-83.7%). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The results of the study indicate that HVPC administered 3 times a week should be considered to accelerate wound closure of chronic leg ulcers.
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