MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139514371 · doi:10.1111/jocd.14070

Role of vitamin D in treatment of keloid

2021· article· en· W3139514371 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Menna Mamdouh, Ghada Abdel Badea Omar, Hala S.A. Hafiz, Sally Mohamed Osama Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cosmetic Dermatology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeloidMedicineScarsLesionFibrosisDermatologyVitaminUltrasoundSurgeryPathologyInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Keloid is a benign well-demarcated overgrowth of fibrotic tissue which extends beyond the original boundaries of a defect. The treatment of keloids is a particular challenge to dermatologists. Intralesional corticosteroid injection has been considered the first-line treatment for keloids. Vitamin D plays an important role in cell proliferation and differentiation as it slows the progression of tissue fibrosis by keloid fibroblasts and inhibits collagen synthesis in dermal fibrosis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of intralesional injection of vitamin D in the treatment of keloids, both clinically and ultrasonically. METHODS: Forty Egyptian patients with keloid scars were injected weekly with intralesional vitamin D with dose of 0.2 ml (200,000 IU) per 1 cm lesion. The keloid scars were evaluated with Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) and by a high-resolution ultrasound using B mode before and after treatment, the patients received 3 to 4 sessions. RESULTS: There was statistically highly significant reduction in VSS after treatment with intralesional vitamin D injection (p value≤0.001). There was also statistically highly significant improvement in ultrasonic keloid scar thickness after treatment (P value ≤0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Intralesional vitamin D is an effective and safe method in treatment of keloid scars. Ultrasound is a useful method in assessing the improvement of keloids after treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.322
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cosmetic DermatologySame topicDermatologic Treatments and ResearchFrench-language works237,207