Healing of a large skin defect in a dog with concurrent ozonated olive oil application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 3-year-old, entire female Labrador retriever, was admitted with an extensive full thickness skin laceration in the lumbar region (Fig 1A). The injury was surgically debrided. The wound was covered with a non-adherent moist dressing. The layer in contact with the wound was made of surgical swabs soaked in 20 mL ozonated olive oil (Ozonella, Onkomed, Poland). The dressing was replaced every 48 hours. On day 12 after the injury, a skin transplant was performed. Pinch grafts obtained from the medial side of the thighs were transplanted onto the granulating tissue of the healing wound (Fig 1B). The wound was covered again with a non-adherent moist dressing composed of surgical swabs soaked in ozonated olive oil. The swabs were kept in place by absorbent cotton roll and then self-adherent elastic wrap. The dressing was replaced every 24 to 72 hours. No antibiotics were used during whole treatment of the described case. Ninety-two percent of the transplanted fragments healed into the recipient site (Fig 1C). Throughout the post-transplant period, the visible granulation tissue was vivid red in colour, and there were no clinical signs of infection. The contact layer of the dressing could be easily removed from the wound surface. The wound was determined to be healed by day 35 via second intention healing with epithelium (Fig 1D).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".