MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318492554 · doi:10.3109/14764172.2015.1114642

Delayed granulomatous reactions to facial cosmetic injections of polymethylmethacrylate microspheres and liquid injectable silicone: A case series

2016· article· en· W2318492554 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel P. Friedmann, Anil Kurian, Richard Fitzpatrick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmetic and Laser Therapy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSiliconeMicrosphereSurgeryRefractory (planetary science)Soft tissueMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polymethylmethacrylate microsphere (PMMA) and liquid injectable silicone (LIS) fillers are non-biodegradable, synthetic polymers utilized for long-term soft-tissue augmentation. Delayed granulomatous reactions to permanent fillers are a rare yet significant event that can occur months to years post procedure and are often refractory to treatment and associated with significant cosmetic morbidity. We report a case series of 4 patients who developed granulomatous reactions to PMMA or LIS, 15 months to 5 years post injection. The etiology of granulomatous reactions to permanent fillers is still poorly understood, with foreign-body reactions and/or biofilms purported to play a role. Real-time biochemical analysis with polymerase chain reaction should be performed when the index of suspicion for the presence of a biofilm is high.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.282
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmetic and Laser TherapySame topicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207