The Split Skin Graft Donor Site: Can Pretreatment with Vitamin a Cream Help?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background A skin graft donor site that heals rapidly with less cosmetic sequelae is of particular benefit to children with burns. Vitamin A cream has been shown to speed up healing after controlled ‘burns’ (dermabrasion and CO 2 laser) if it is applied six weeks before treatment. Objective To assess whether pretreatment with vitamin A cream increases the rate of healing of split skin graft donor sites in children with burns. Methods Prospective study of children with hot water burns of 8% to 30% that required split thickness skin grafting. Vitamin A cream was applied bidaily to one thigh and/or buttock of each child for five to seven days before skin grafting. At surgery, equal thickness grafts were harvested from both thighs and/or buttocks. Biopsies were taken from each thigh and/or buttock and were sent for histological analysis. The rate of donor site healing was monitored clinically and with serial photographs. Results No difference in the rate of healing was noted between the treated and untreated sides by either histological or clinical criteria. Conclusions Vitamin A cream applied bidaily for a period of five to seven days did not affect the healing rate of the split skin graft donor sites in children with burns.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".