Intra‐ and inter‐evaluator reliability of the MyotonPRO for the assessment of the viscoelastic properties of caesarean section scar and unscarred skin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical evaluation of viscoelastic properties of the Caesarean section (C-section) scar, such as stiffness and elasticity, is usually carried out using subjective scales and palpation techniques. There is currently no reliable and valid tool that objectively quantifies these properties. The MyotonPRO could fill this gap. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nineteen healthy women aged between 21 and 40 years with C-section scars participated in this reliability study. Two points, one on the scar and one on unscarred skin, were measured four times successively with the MyotonPRO by three independent evaluators on the same day. The intra-class correlation (ICC) coefficients were estimated using a two-factor ANOVA to determine the inter- and intra-rater reliability. The capacity of the MyotonPRO to discriminate the viscoelastic properties of the C-Section scar against unscarred skin was assessed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: The intra- and inter-rater reliability of the viscoelastic property measurements was good to excellent (ICC 0.99-1.00 and 0.87-0.98, respectively). There was no significant difference between C-section scar and unscarred skin in terms of elasticity (P = .737). Significant differences between C-section scars and unscarred skin tissue were observed for tone (P < .001), stiffness (P < .001), creep (P < .001), and mechanical stress relaxation time (P < .001). CONCLUSION: The MyotonPRO is a reliable tool for an objective measurement of the viscoelastic properties of the C-section scar and unscarred skin. The MyotonPRO can discriminate the viscoelastic properties of the C-section scar against the unscarred skin, for tone, stiffness, creep and relaxation times, but not for elasticity.
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 | 0.016 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".