MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285609530 · doi:10.25270/wnds/2022.135140

Human Amniotic Membrane vs Collagen in the Treatment of Superficial Second-degree Burns in Children

2022· article· en· W4285609530 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aureen Ruby DCunha, Susan Jehangir, Grace Rebekah, Reju Joseph Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueWOUNDS A Compendium of Clinical Research and Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCorneal Surgery and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScarsSecond-Degree BurnItchingSurgerySerous fluidWound healingBurn woundInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The authors compared a 1-time application of bovine collagen and human amniotic membrane (HAM) to treat children with superficial second-degree burns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, blinded, internally randomized trial of 43 children was conducted. Fresh HAM (prepared in-house at the Christian Medical College, Vellore) and bovine collagen were applied to different halves of each wound and dried naturally to form a hard, shell-like, so-called exoskeleton. The shell was shed as epithelialization occurred beneath it. Clinical examination and serial photographs were used to track progress until the wound healed completely, as well as at 3 and 6 months after the burn injury. Two burns surgeons blinded to the material used evaluated the resulting scars using the Vancouver Scar Scale. RESULTS: The 43 children presented 3 hours after burn injury on average. A 1-time application was successful in 40 children (93%). After the dressing dried, all parents reported that their child was pain free and the exoskeleton could be handled over the burned area. A total of 16 children (37%) with a low-grade fever at the time of application were treated with simple antipyretic agents. Eight children reported itching at the dressing site. The dressing did not take or was removed in 3 children (7%). Minor serous collections occurred in 8 children who subsequently underwent aspiration. The median time to healing was 10 days in both study arms, with no significant difference in scarring between the 2 materials. Children with earlier shedding of the shell had significantly better scar quality (P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: Collagen and HAM are safe and provide a one-time ambulatory option for burn dressing with comparable time to healing and scarring. Earlier shedding of the dressing is predictive of better scar quality. Because HAM is inexpensive and simple to prepare and store, it is an excellent choice for use in economically disadvantaged areas where collagen may be unavailable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.274
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWOUNDS A Compendium of Clinical Research and PracticeSame topicCorneal Surgery and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207