MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385472545 · doi:10.14740/jmc4132

Efficacy and Safety of Carbon Dioxide Laser System in the Treatment of Scalp Sebaceous Adenoma With the Use of a New Scanner Unit

2023· article· en· W4385472545 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paolo Bonan, Giustino Gallo, Irene Fusco, Francesca Madeddu, Tiziano Zingoni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScalpForeheadCarbon dioxide laserLesionLidocaineErythemaItchingSurgeryDermatologyLaserLaser surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sebaceous adenoma (SA) is a rare solitary tumor that preferentially affects the forehead and scalp. The objective of this case report was to determine the efficacy and safety of a 10,600-nm carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) laser device in the treatment of large scalp SA, using a new scanning system which allows to speed up the removal of the lesion. A 65-year-old male with SA on the scalp area underwent one session with the CO 2 laser system. For this procedure, a new scanner system with 7-inch or 4-inch focal handpieces were used. A local anesthesia with lidocaine was performed before laser treatment. Some possible side effects such as dyschromia, burning sensation, bleeding and mild to moderate post-treatment erythema, itching, crusting, and edema, were checked. In order to monitor the effectiveness of the treatment, clinical photos that documented the patient lesion were captured before treatment and at 1 month of follow-up. The clinical and aesthetic results observed after laser procedure were excellent, with a complete remission of patient’s scalp SA lesion at 4 weeks’ follow-up. Patient satisfaction was very high, and no side effects were observed. This laser system technology allows for precise, effective, and targeted action on the lesions treated while simultaneously protecting the surrounding areas, ensuring the best possible re-epithelialization. J Med Cases. 2023;14(7):251-254 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc4132

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207