Aesthetic outcome of different subunits of face with various modalities of reconstruction in facial basal cell carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The incidence of basal cell carcinoma(bcc) involving face is on rise. One of the most promising therapies to this tumour is excision, which leaves a defect that has to be reconstructed in a way that would bring the best possible aesthetic and functional outcome. Aesthetically face is classified into many subunits, each contributing cumulatively to the final appearance of face. Reconstructing these subunits after the excision of bcc to impart a near normal appearance is a very challenging task. The outcome depends on various aspects like the skin type, photodamage , the subunit involved and the type of reconstruction . Aim: This study aims to assess the effect of skin type , photodamage, the site of bcc and the type of reconstruction on the aesthetic outcome through modified Vancouver scar scale scoring system. Material and methods : A prospective study was conducted on 53 patients with facial basal cell carcinoma from February 2020 to February 2022. Patients were classified into Fitzpatrick types . Photodamages were assessed. Keloidal tendencies were ruled out.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".