MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285509386 · doi:10.56443/rsm.v74i5.61

Cicatrización por segunda intención de heridas quirúrgicas y quemaduras

2021· article· es· W4285509386 on OpenAlexaff
P Peña-Santoyo, A Figueroa-Rodríguez, D Flores-Pimentel, JA Patiño-Salazar, B Flores-Aldana

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Sanidad Militar · 2021
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing care and research
Canadian institutionsBioPhage Pharma (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introducción: El proceso de cicatrización de heridas y quemaduras por segunda intención es afectado por infecciones. Pirfenidona (PFD) al 8% combinada con dialil óxido de disulfuro modificado (M-DDO 0.016%), en gel tópico, posee propiedades antiinflamatorias, antisépticas y moduladoras de la reparación tisular.
 Objetivo: Describir los resultados de cicatrización de heridas y quemaduras, tratados con PFD 8% y M-DDO al 0.016%.
 Material y métodos: Estudio retrospectivo descriptivo de 36 casos clínicos (20 quemaduras y 16 heridas), atendidos en 14 hospitales de México, durante cinco años. El porcentaje de cierre de la herida, se definió como cambio porcentual del tamaño de la herida, entre inicio y final.
 Resultados: Los pacientes con heridas tenían edad promedio de 41.3 ± 14.8 años, el 50% de los participantes eran mujeres y el 19% padecían diabetes. El 50% de los participantes con quemaduras fueron mujeres, la mediana de edad fue 11.5 años. El 66.6% de los pacientes presentó curación completa, el 30.5% presentaron una mejoría ?70%. En promedio, en 9 semanas de tratamiento se obtiene cierre de la herida.
 Conclusión: El gel de pirfenidona y M-DDO es una alternativa eficaz y segura para el cierre por segunda intención de heridas y quemaduras.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de Sanidad MilitarSame topicNursing care and researchFrench-language works237,207