MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2368213542

Clinical Observation on the Effect of Skin Wound Tension Reduction Device on Inhibiting Post-surgery Scar

2015· article· en· W2368213542 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chen Li-bi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Tissue Engineering and Reconstructive Surgery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypertrophic scarMedicineScarsSurgeryHypertrophic scarsKeloidReduction (mathematics)Wound healing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To explore the effect of the skin tension reduction device on reducing scar formation after excisional surgery of hypertrophic scars and keloids. Methods Total 10 patients with hypertrophic scars and keloids were enrolled in this study. All of them received excisional surgery. Total 10 patients were involved as a self control study with part of wound treated with tendon reduction device, the other part with no treatment as control. All patients were observed for scar formation at surgical wound sites for 3 months post-surgery. Scar width and Vancouver scar scale were used as the parameter to quantify the differences between two groups. Results Compared with control group, the postoperative scar in tension reduction group was narrower in scar width and lower in the Vancouver scar scale scores with statistical significance(P0.05). Conclusion Application of the skin reduction device can efficiently inhibit wound tension induced scar formation at post-surgery sites with significant reduction of scar width and hyperplasia after excisional surgery of hypertrophic scars/keloids.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.328
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 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Tissue Engineering and Reconstructive SurgerySame topicDermatologic Treatments and ResearchFrench-language works237,207