Biomechanical behavior of scar tissue and uninjured skin in a porcine model
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
A new method to test axial and transverse tensile properties of skin was developed to improve our understanding of skin mechanical behavior, and how it changes following injury and formation of a scar. Skin tissue was evaluated at 70 days following full-thickness wounding in juvenile female pigs (N=14). Samples were taken in the axial (cranial-caudal) and transverse (dorsal-ventral) directions, for both scar tissue and uninjured skin, and were evaluated mechanically in vitro using a protocol of stress relaxation followed by tensile failure. Uninjured skin was more compliant, with a larger toe-in region, and faster load relaxation, in the axial direction than the transverse. Such directional differences were not present in high-load responses, such as linear stiffness or failure properties. When compared with uninjured skin, scars displayed a similar linear stiffness, with considerably reduced failure properties, and reduced low-load compliance. Scars showed no directional differences in low-load behavior, viscous response, or failure properties. These findings suggest morphological changes that may occur with injury that are consistent with the viscoelastic and directional changes observed experimentally. This improved understanding of how injury affects skin biomechanical function provides valuable information necessary for the design of successful grafting procedures and tissue-engineered skin replacements.
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