MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015722019 · doi:10.17816/ptors16298

The benefits of early surgical treatment of deep cervical burns in children

2020· article· en· W3015722019 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pavel A. Gnipov, Alexey G. Baindurashvili, Marina A. Brazol, E. V. Mitrofanova, Maxim R. Melnikov, Gleb Mashevskiy

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Traumatology Orthopaedics and Reconstructive Surgery · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. The frequency of deep cervical burns in children is four times higher than that of deep face burns. Currently, there is no consensus on the methods for surgical treatment of deep burns in cervical areas; meshed skin autografts continue to be used. Aim. To evaluate the benefits of early surgical treatment of deep сervical burns in children between the third and fifth days from the moment of injury. Materials and methods. Case-control study. Surgical treatment was performed in 81 children with deep cervical burns. The main group with early surgical treatment included 46 children and underwent surgical treatment at 3.37 0.14 days from the moment of injury; the control group received autograft during stage treatment for 35 children at 27.17 0.18 days. The treatment results were evaluated by the following indicators: the number of dressing changes, the period of skin restoration, and the area of graft success. In the long term, functional and cosmetic treatment results were evaluated. Results. In the study and control groups, 7.93 0.45 and 18.75 0.61 dressings were required to complete the treatment, respectively (p 0.001). The skin restoration periods were 16.54 0.68 and 36.94 0.89 days, respectively (p 0.001). The graft success areas were 99.50% 0.13% in the main group and 93.91% 2.68% in the control (p 0.001). During the staged surgical treatment, one patient showed a loss of 90% of the graft, which required regrafting. Other complications in the treatment process have not been noted. When assessing long-term cosmetic results using the Vancouver Scar Scale, the average score was 4.0 0.26 points in the main group and 7 0.28 points in the control (p 0.001). The presence of post-burn cicatricial contracture in the main group was noted in 12 (26%) people and the absence in 34 (74%) children. In the control group, 20 (57%) patients required surgical removal of post-burn deformity, and 15 (43%) children did not need further surgical interventions. Conclusions. Early surgical treatment of deep cervical burns in children on the third and fifth days from injury allows not only to accelerate the process of restoration of the skin but also to directly affect the cosmetic and functional results in a better way.

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 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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Traumatology Orthopaedics and Reconstructive SurgerySame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207