The effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation on the viability of random skin flaps in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the role of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in the viability of random skin flaps. In 30 Wistar-EPM rats, a random 10×4 cm skin flap was raised and a plastic barrier was interposed between the flap and its bed. Immediately after surgery and for two subsequent days, the rats in group 1 (the control group) were anesthetized for 1 h with the electrodes positioned in the base of the flap and without the administration of the electric stimulus. The rats in group 2 (the treatment group) were submitted to TENS for 1 h immediately after the surgery and for two subsequent days. The percentage of necrotic area (averages of 43.11% in the rats in group 1 and 23.52% in the rats in group 2) was calculated on the seventh postoperative day in both groups. Statistical analysis proved that TENS was more efficient in increasing random skin flap viability than was the method used in the control group.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".