MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975119289 · doi:10.1111/dth.12989

The Effect of Platelet Rich Plasma on Hair Re‐growth in Patients with Alopecia Areata Totalis: a Clinical Pilot Study

2019· article· en· W2975119289 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDermatologic Therapy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHair Growth and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlopecia areataPlatelet-rich plasmaMedicineScalpHair lossHair growthPlateletDermatologySurgeryInternal medicinePhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autologous rich plasma (PRP) is blood plasma with enhanced concentration of platelets and is enriched with several growth factors which stimulate tissue regeneration. The current study aimed to investigate the effect of PRP on hair regrowth in patients with alopecia areata (AA) totalis. Ten subjects (28.9 ± 6.28 years; five males and five females) with clinically diagnosed AA totalis for at least 3 years who had not received any treatment within 3 months prior to the study were recruited. Blood sample was collected in thrombocyte harvesting tubes. The PRP was separated via centrifugation. The patients' scalp was divided sagittally into two approximately equal parts. In each patient, 4 mL of PRP was injected intradermally into the left or right side of the scalp; in each point, 0.1 mL of PRP was injected. Each patient was followed up monthly for 4 months. No hair regrowth was seen in eight patients and in two patients only <10% hair regrowth was observed. Totally, no significant effect was found for PRP on hair regrowth (p > .05). There was no side effect during treatment. Single dermal PRP injection did not prove to have any effect on hair regrowth in these patients.

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)0.000
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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.283
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