Effect of a sustained silver-releasing dressing on ulcers with delayed healing: the CONTOP study
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
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of the sustained silver-releasing foam dressing Contreet Foam (ColoplastA/S) with local best practice (LBP) on delayed healing ulcers using a real-life setting. METHOD: A total of 619 patients with ulcers of varying aetiologies were treated for four weeks with either the silver foam dressing or LBP. RESULTS: Wound area was reduced by 50% with the silver foam and 34% with LBP Less slough and maceration, a faster reduction in exudate level and more positive wound progress was achieved with the silver foam. In addition, exudate handling, ease of use, odour and pain improved. Less time was spent on dressing changes, and mean wear time was longer for the silver foam (3.1 days) than for LBP (2.1 days). All differences were statistically significant (p < 0.05). The silver foam dressing outperformed all of the other dressing categories including moist wound healing products and other silver dressings. CONCLUSION: This large-scale comparative real-life study shows that the silver foam dressing supports faster healing of delayed healing wounds.
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