MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388041275 · doi:10.3390/toxins15110636

Efficacy of Botulinum Toxin Type A for Prevention of Post-Mastectomy Scar in Transmen: A Prospective, Randomized Study

2023· article· en· W4388041275 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Waranaree Winayanuwattikun, Vasanop Vachiramon, Teerapong Rattananukrom, Pasita Palakornkitti, Ngamcherd Sitpahul

Bibliographic record

VenueToxins · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBreast Implant and Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScarsSurgeryHypertrophic scarPlaceboMastectomyRandomized controlled trialProspective cohort studyInternal medicineBreast cancerPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous mastectomies in transmen have been gaining popularity. However, post-operative scars are an inevitable consequence. Recently, Botulinum neurotoxin A (BoNT-A) has shown positive effects in scar prevention. The objective of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of BoNT-A in scar prevention. METHODS: Fifteen patients who had undergone subcutaneous mastectomy were included. At 14 days post-surgery, either incoBoNT-A or a placebo was injected into the scar on each side. The primary outcome assessment measured the scar's severity using the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) and the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). The secondary outcome assessment evaluated the scar's color using a standard measurement device. Outcome assessments were conducted until 6 months post-surgery. RESULTS: < 0.001). The objective assessment revealed a statistically significant decrease in redness values in the BoNT-A group compared to the placebo at 3 and 6 months. CONCLUSION: BoNT-A has demonstrated effectiveness in scar prevention by reducing the severity of postoperative scar formation and improving overall scar appearance.

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)0.000
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToxinsSame topicBreast Implant and ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207