Study the efficacy of intralesional pentoxifylline versus triamcinolone acetonide in keloid scars patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Keloids are prevalent fibro-proliferative tumors, and treating them is still a challenge although intralesional injections of triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) are effective, they have frequently linked adverse effects. Pentoxifylline (PTX) is an anti-fibrotic and anti-inflammatory, and vasodilator. It has not yet been tested for intralesional injection in keloids. The aim of the study is to study the efficacy of intralesional pentoxifylline versus triamcinolone acetonide in keloid scars of 40 patients. In this study, 40 patients with keloid scars regardless of the cause of keloid born, 20 patients have injected with intralesional triamcinolone acetonide, and 20 patients with intralesional pentoxifylline every two weeks until the lesion flatted or a maximum 6 sessions. Evaluation of Patient response to treatment was done by utilizing the verbal rating scale and Vancouver scar scale. Between groups A& B there is no statistically significant difference in height, color, the surface of the keloid, pigmentation consistency, verbal rating scale, visual analog scale (improvement in keloid), patient satisfaction, and several sessions for best results.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".