MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394929982 · doi:10.1093/jbcr/irae036.050

58 Objective and Subjective Melanin Measurements Within Dyschromic Scars Do Not Correlate: A Treatment Evaluation Problem

2024· article· en· W4394929982 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Monica V. Collins, Jennifer T. Huang, Taryn E Travis, Melissa M McLawhorn, Jeffrey W. Shupp, Bonnie C Carney

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Burn Care & Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicmelanin and skin pigmentation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineScarsDermatologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Dyschromia, the presence of hyper- and/or hypopigmented epidermis, is a common result of burn injury and is associated with negative aesthetic outcomes. Three clinical scales, the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale - Patient (POSAS-P), Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale - Observer (POSAS-O), and modified Vancouver Scar Scale (mVSS) are used to evaluate dyschromia when assessing treatment options and outcomes. However, these assessment tools have yet to be validated against objective scar tissue melanin measurements. We hypothesize that these scar scales do not adequately capture pigmentation changes, necessitating more accurate metrics for clinical assessment. Methods Patients (n=98) with dyschromic burn scars due to thermal, chemical, electrical, or friction burns were recruited from a local burn center. Scars were rated on the POSAS-P, POSAS-O, and mVSS and the melanin content of uninjured skin and hyper-pigmented scar tissue was assessed using a Skin Color Catch non-invasive probe. The “degree of hyperpigmentation” (DOH) was calculated by the change in melanin content from the normal skin (NS) to the hyper-pigmented scar tissue, which was tested for correlation with POSAS-P-color and POSAS-O-pigmentation scores. The DOH between scars in each of the four categories of the mVSS-pigment was compared. For POSAS-P and POSAS-O, a higher score indicates more dyschromia. For mVSS, dyschromia is categorized. Results Hyperpigmented scars were on average 96.08±6.08 Melanin Index points higher than NS. Observers rated hyperpigmented scars high at 7.14±0.28 while patients rated higher at 7.67±0.24 (both out of 10). The most common mVSS-pigment category observed was 2, mixed pigmentation. The correlations between POSAS-P-color and DOH and POSAS-O-pigmentation and DOH were not significant (r=-0.033, p=0.7455 and r=-0.12, p=0.2323). Additionally, there were no significant differences in melanin index means between scars in the four mVSS-pigment categories (p < 0.05). Conclusions The non-significant correlation between the scoring value from the POSAS-P, POSAS-O, and mVSS with DOH indicate that these tools do not adequately capture degree of dyschromia in patients with dyspigmentation following burn injury. Applicability of Research to Practice The data from these scales should not solely be used to evaluate treatment effect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.055
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.055
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Burn Care & ResearchSame topicmelanin and skin pigmentationFrench-language works237,207