Mid-Term Follow-Up Study of Children Undergoing Autologous Skin Transplantation for Burns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep partial and full-thickness burns require surgical treatment with autologous skin grafts after necrectomy, which is the generally accepted way to achieve permanent wound coverage. This study sought to examine the grafted and donor areas of children who underwent autologous skin transplantation, using two assessment scales to determine the severity of the scarring and the cosmetic outcome during long-term follow-up. At the Surgical Unit of the Department of Paediatrics of the University of Pécs, between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2019, children who had been admitted consecutively and received autologous skin transplantation were analyzed. Twenty patients met the inclusion criteria in this retrospective cohort study. The authors assessed the results using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). There was a significant difference in how parents and examiners perceived the children’s scars. In the evaluation of the observer scale, the most critical variables for the area of skin grafted were relief and thickness. Besides color, relief was the worst clinical characteristic on the patient scale. However, when medical professionals evaluated the donor site, significantly better results were obtained compared to the transplanted area (average observer scale score: 1.4 and 2.35, p = 0.001; VSS: 0.85 vs. 2.60, p < 0.001), yet it was similar to the graft site in the parents’ opinion (Patient Scale: 2.95 and 4.45, p = 0.181).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".