MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2357379802

The observation of the quality after the wound healing of composite transplantion of accellular allo-dermismatrix with auto-microskin on deep burn wound

2009· article· en· W2357379802 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chiyu Jia

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Journal of Aesthetic Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryTransplantationBurn woundWound healingEscharAbrasion (mechanical)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective this paper is to select opportune coverage materials for the restoration of Large area and deep burn wound to improve the wound healing effects and to address the source of autologous Medium Ternstroemia problem of insufficient.Methods 16 cases of large area and deep burn wound were divided into two groups to graft skin after eschar excision:the experimental group:the clinical observation of composite transplantation of acellular dermal matrix with autologous split-thickness skin(composite transplantation for short) the control group:transplantation with split-thickness skin simply,and then the long-term effects of the wound and donor site were evaluated with Vancouver scar scale.Results one months after the surgery,there was no marked difference in the the appearance,texture,abrasion resistance,function of joint and Vancouver score of the experimental group and the control group.Six and tweleve months after the surgery,the appearance,texture,abrasion resistance,function of joint,patients' satisfaction and Vancouver score of the experimental group obviously excelled the control one.Conclusions The composite transplantation for a patient of large area deep burn wound is opportunely operated,relieving scar hyperplasia,improving the wound appearance and the function of joint,achieving the effect of the middle thickness skin transplantation.

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)0.002
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 score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Journal of Aesthetic MedicineSame topicTissue Engineering and Regenerative MedicineFrench-language works237,207