Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONVATECMedical products and technologies company ConvaTec has launched its Aquacel Foam dressing in a range of new rectangular sizes, which can be used in a wider variety of anatomical wound care applications.Featuring contact layer, the Aquacel Foam dressing is suitable for exuding acute, chronic and traumatic wounds, including dermabrasions and surgical incisions.The new sizes of the Aquacel dressing comprise 8 cm × 13 cm (3 × 5), 10 cm × 20 cm (4 × 8), 10 cm × 25 cm (4 × 10) and 10 cm × 30 cm (4 × 12).These new sizes have been designed to use the dressing on a variety of positions, including the head and neck, shoulder, lower leg and wrist, as well as the lower abdomen for appendectomies, cesarean sections and midline incisions.Wound Therapeutics general manager Joe Rolley said: 'Adding these sizes to the Aquacel Foam portfolio is in direct response to customer and patient needs.The launch of Aquacel Foam dressing was the most successful in ConvaTec's history because no one else provides the comfort of a foam dressing with the properties of Hydrofiber Technology to manage wounds'.Part of the full portfolio of Aquacel Foam dressings, the new rectangular sizes are available with a silicone adhesive border only and non-adhesive options are not currently available.Initially, the company will market the new sizes in the UK, France, the Nordic countries, Canada, Bulgaria, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand and the US.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.441 | 0.370 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".