MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2415760156 · doi:10.1097/dss.0000000000000582

Comparison of 532 nm Potassium Titanyl Phosphate Laser and 595 nm Pulsed Dye Laser in the Treatment of Erythematous Surgical Scars

2015· article· en· W2415760156 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatologic Surgery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScarsMedicinePotassium titanyl phosphateSurgeryDye laserHypertrophic scarsLaserDermatologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The pulsed dye laser (PDL) has long been used for treatment of erythematous and hypertrophic scars. Its effectiveness has been attributed in large part to its vascular-specificity. The vascular-specific potassium titanyl phosphate (KTP) laser has also been reported to be clinically effective for scars, but has not been compared to the PDL. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and clinical efficacy of a 532-nm KTP laser versus a 595-nm PDL in improving the appearance of erythematous surgical scars. METHODS: Twenty patients with matched bilateral erythematous surgical scars or a single linear erythematous scar measuring longer than 5 cm were enrolled in the study. Single scars were divided into equal halves with each half randomized to receive 3 successive treatments at 6-week intervals with either a 532-nm KTP laser (Excel V; Brisbane, CA) or a 595-nm PDL (Cynergy; Cynosure Inc., Chelmsford, MA) at equivalent laser parameters. Bilateral matched scars were similarly randomized to receive three 532-nm KTP or 595-nm PDL treatments. Clinical efficacy was evaluated 12 weeks after the third (final) laser treatment by independent, blinded photographic scar assessments. Secondary evaluations included final investigator and subject treatment/satisfaction assessments, Vancouver scar scale (VSS) scores, subject scar symptoms, intraoperative pain scores, and incidence of side effects. RESULTS: Clinical improvement of erythematous surgical scars was observed with both 532-nm KTP and 595-nm PDL systems. No statistically significant differences between the 2 treatment arms were noted in the independent, blinded photographic scar assessments, investigator and subject treatment/satisfaction assessments, subject scar symptoms, and intraoperative pain scores. The KTP arm produced statistically significant improvement for the vascularity component of the VSS only. Side effects were limited to mild treatment discomfort and minimal transient post-treatment erythema and purpura. No vesiculation, infection, scarring or other adverse events were experienced. Subject satisfaction surveys mirrored the observed clinical effects. CONCLUSION: The-532 nm KTP laser is comparable in efficacy and safety to the 595-nm PDL laser in the treatment of erythematous surgical scars.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.266 · 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