Prospective Study of Wound Infections in Mohs Micrographic Surgery Using a Single Set of Instruments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) has a low rate of surgical site infections (SSI). To date, there are variations in the measures surgeons take to prevent SSI, although these may be costly without benefit to patients. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the rate of SSI in MMS performed with a clean technique using a single set of instruments for both tumor extirpation and reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The author prospectively evaluated 338 patients undergoing MMS using a single set of instruments for SSI. RESULTS: There were 7 SSI among 332 patients, with an overall infection rate of 2.1% (7/332). Graft closures had an SSI rate of 3.1% (2/64) and flap closures had an SSI rate of 1.9% (5/268). CONCLUSION: Using a single set of sterile surgical instruments for both the tumor extirpation and repair stages of MMS leads to cost savings without harming patients and maintains SSI rates within an acceptable range.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".