The Effectiveness of 595-nm Pulsed Dye Laser for the Treatment of Bilateral Cleft-Lip Scars in Asian Patients: A 6-Month Prospective, Randomized, Self-Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study is the first prospective within-patient self-controlled research seeking to investigate the safety and efficacy of 595 nm pulsed-dye laser (PDL) for the treatment of cleft-lip scars. Approach: This prospective, randomized, self-controlled study is based on the clinical records of the patients who received laser-assisted treatment due to bilateral cleft-lip scars. The bilateral scars were randomly assigned to the 595 nm PDL group with five consecutive sessions at 2-week intervals or control group in a blinded manner of evaluators, with subsequent follow-up for 6 months after the final treatment. Clinical efficacy and safety outcomes were evaluated by Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ), and other objective evaluations. Results: A total of 18 patients were included. The 595 nm PDL-treated sides showed statistically significant improvement in VSS after treatment at follow-up compared with the baseline ( p < 0.05). Interestingly, the 595 nm-PDL-treated side achieved significantly better improvement in scar pigmentation and pliability ( p < 0.05). Though there was statistically significant difference between two groups ( p < 0.05), the gap in overall PSAQ is not obvious. And comparison by area and coloring evaluation (E/M index) also suggests that the responses of scars to treatment by PDL were slightly improved ( p < 0.05). Innovation and Conclusion: It is the first time to apply the 595nm PDL for cleft-lip scars. It would be a better choice for the early treatment of red scar with proliferative tendency after cleft-lip surgery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".