Evaluation of Adverse Reactions and Effects of Triamcinolone Acetonide Combined with Compound Betamethasone in Keloid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To explore the drug effect and adverse reaction of triamcinolone acetonide combined with compound betamethasone in keloid is the objective of the study. 100 patients were randomly divided into study group and control group (50 patients in each group). The research group received sequential treatment with triamcinolone acetonide injection combined with compound betamethasone injection and the control group received compound betamethasone injection. Both groups had 3 courses of treatment and each course of treatment lasted for 3 w. The Vancouver scar scale score, treatment effect and adverse reactions were compared between the two groups and the recurrence rate was followed up for 1 y after the end of medication. Before treatment, there was no significant difference in Vancouver scar scale scores between the two groups but after medication, the study group was better than that of the control group (p<0.05). The total effective rate of the study group (82 %) was higher than that of the control group (54 %, p<0.05). The total incidence of adverse drug reactions in the study group was 8 % while in the control group it was 6 % and the comparison between the two groups was not statistically significant. The recurrence rates of the study group and the control group were 28 % and 34 % 6 mo after the end of medication and 32 % and 42 % after 12 mo. There was a significant difference between the two groups. The sequential injection of triamcinolone acetonide combined with compound betamethasone is effective in the treatment of keloids, with high safety and low recurrence rate, which is worthy of clinical recommendation. sunny leone threesome, new hd sex video, beautiful indian bhabhi fukad hard by devar, Indonesian nurse sex scandal, desi bhabhi xxx, xxx indian bf video
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".