Keloid therapy: A neoteric comparative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Keloids are considered disorders of fibroproliferation characterized by accumulation of collagen fibers in hypodermis and dermis, caused by inflammation, surgery, and trauma. OBJECTIVES: The main goal of the study was to approach a better modality for the treatment of keloids by comparing the effects and the side effects of intralesional cryotherapy and intralesional injection of bleomycin. METHODS: This interventional, comparative clinical trial was conducted on 60 cases and was divided equally into the group (A), combined group who were subjected to intralesional bleomycin followed by cryotherapy in the same session, group (B) who were subjected to intralesional injection of bleomycin, and group (C) intralesional cryotherapy. All cases were subjected to clinical examination, complete history taking, dermatological examination, examination, and evaluation of scar lesion using the Vancouver scar scale. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant decrease in pliability among the combined group. Also, pliability decreased in the bleomycin group and cryotherapy, but this decrease wasn't statistically significant. Our results revealed that there was a statistically significant decrease in lesion height among all the studied groups, but the decrease was more among the combined group. CONCLUSION: Intralesional cryotherapy was effective as intralesional bleomycin. Combined therapy was a valid and more effective technique with few adverse effects than either alone for keloids as it achieved a decrease in volumes of scars or accompanied symptoms.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".