Comparative Analysis of Two Different Treatment Methods in Pilonidal Sinus Disease in Childhood: Phenol and Surgical Excision
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) is a common infectious and chronic inflammatory problem in the pediatric age group with no precise incidence data. PSD is more common in the pediatric age group between the ages of 15-17 due to rush routine educational activities in this age group, such as university entrance examinations. It is essential to early back to the daily routine, which the patient and parent highly desire, after treatment in PSD. This study was performed between December 2016 and March 2020. The files of 152 pediatric patients treated for PSD were analyzed retrospectively. The study group included 96 boys (63.2%) and 56 girls (36.8%). Eighty-five patients (55.9%) underwent phenol application, 41 (27.0%) underwent surgery, and 26 (17.1%) children underwent multiple procedures. The mean age of the patients was 16.2±1.39 years. The mean follow-up time was 21.6±12.2 months, and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 25.2±4.4 kg/m2. In the phenol group, the mean age was 16.3±1.2 years, the mean follow-up time was 17.3±9.55 months, and the mean BMI was 24.6±4.31 kg/m2. In the surgical group, the mean age was 16.0±1.74 years, the follow-up time was 35.6±3.82 months, and the mean BMI was 25.6±4.66 kg/m2. The patients' demographic data were gathered age, gender, BMI, type of procedure, number of applications, follow-up, complications, recurrence rate, and postoperative complication. Phenol application has essential advantages over surgical procedures in treating PSD, such as simple application, short hospitalization, cost-effectiveness, and low complication rates. To sum up, the phenol procedure is a straightforward treatment method that reduces complication rates and provides an early return to ordinary life.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".