Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: An extensive burn is one of the most serious injuries. The modern treatment of pediatric burns is a logical exercise in resuscitation, infection control, surgical wound care, nutrition and psychologic and physical rehabilitation. The conventional methods of local therapy, especially in extensive and deep burns, cannot prevent infection. The fact is that the necrotic burn tissue always gives rise to infection and must therefore be excised. Tangential excision is a diagnostic procedure as well as a surgical preparation of a recipient bed for skin graft. Clinical parameters of sixty extensively burned children have been evaluated, divided into two groups (surgically and non-surgically treated) and in four subgroups (under and over the 25% TBSA). The following criteria have been used to compare the results: pain, fever, body weight, duration of the hospital stay, wound infenction, laboratory values. Aim of research: The aim of our research was to demonstrate the efficacy of early tangential necrectomy in the treatment of extensive burns in children as well as in preventing the burn diseases. Material and methods: Clinical parameters of sixty extensively burned children have been evaluated, divided into two groups (surgically and non-surgically treated) and in four subgroups (under and over the 25% TBSA). The following criteria have been used to compare the results: pain, fever, body weight, duration of the hospital stay, wound infection, laboratory values. Results: The boys comprised 58.3% of the respondents and the girls were 41,7% of the respondents. The most common cause was the hot liquid of 73.3%, open flame 23.3% and the contact with hot metal 3.3%. The body temperature was significantly higher in control group compared to the examined group (p <0.001) significantly lower hematocrit values in the control group compared to the examined group (p = 0.002). The results show that hospitalization lasted considerably longer in patients in the control group than in the examined group (p = 0.003). The incidence of bacterial infection of the burns is significantly higher in control compared to the examined group of patients (p = 0.007). The most commonly isolated bacteria in the study group was Staphylococcus aureus (15/30 or 50% of all subjects). Acinetobacter spp. was isolated in 9 patients (30% of respondents). Serratia spp. And Enterococcus Foecalis were isolated in 6 patients (20%). Pseudomonas aeruginosa was isolated in 3 patients (10%). Three patients (10%) did not isolate any bacteria during hospitalization Conclusions: The method of early tangential necrectomy of extensively burned children significantly reduce morbidity and mortality (it improves the general condition of the patient, improves clinical and laboratory parameters, reduces the possibility of infection of the wound, reduces the possibility of sepsis, reduces the length of hospitalization).The most optimal time to perform an early tangential necrectomy is the period between the 4th and the 6th day after the injury. In extensively burned children over 30% of the total body surface, an early tangential necrectomy should be performed on an area of about 20% of the total body surface as a prevention of blood loss due to necrectomy and autotransplantation. With extensively burned children over 40% of the total body surface, taking homotransplants from parents or close relatives reduces morbidity and mortality.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".