MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genetic analysis of skin wound healing and scarring in a porcine model

2006· article· en· W2172100231 on OpenAlexaff
Corrie L. Gallant‐Behm, David A. Hart

Bibliographic record

VenueWound Repair and Regeneration · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWound healingScarsContraction (grammar)HyperpigmentationBreedMedicinePhenotypeDermatologyPathologyBiologySurgeryGeneGeneticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contraction is a normal part of skin wound healing and wound closure; however, excessive contraction and severe scarring concern patients and physicians alike. The present study has investigated the degree and kinetics of wound contraction in a porcine model of wound healing, to elucidate the genetic and molecular basis for abnormal skin wound healing and scarring. Healing of excisional skin wounds in juvenile female Yorkshire pigs closely resembled normal healing in humans. In contrast, identical wounds in female red Duroc pigs contracted significantly more, forming hypercontracted, hyperpigmented scars. Yorkshire x red Duroc F1 animals healed without hyperpigmentation, but with significantly greater wound contraction than observed in either parent breed. To examine the genetic transmission of the hypercontractile phenotype, all F1 animals were bred to a single Yorkshire boar, generating 20 backcross animals. All backcross animals healed with significantly less contraction than the normal Yorkshire animals. These findings suggest that the genetic contribution to scar phenotype in this animal model is complex, with a limited number of major genes controlling wound contraction, and an unknown number of minor genes that appear to modulate the impact of the major genes.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations49
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWound Repair and RegenerationSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207