MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398156262 · doi:10.25270/wnds/23143

Multidisciplinary Expert Consensus Statements and Recommendations for Use of Hypochlorous Acid as a Solution for Negative Pressure Wound Therapy With Instillation

2024· article· en· W4398156262 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paul J. Kim, Luis G. Fernández, Mary Ann Obst, Abigail E. Chaffin, Elizabeth Faust, John C Lantis, Kara Couch, Michael N Desvigne, Mark Suski, Neilendu Kundu, Marc R. Matthews, Richard Simman, Christine Murphy, Natalie E. Nierenberg, Luc Téot

Bibliographic record

VenueWOUNDS A Compendium of Clinical Research and Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypochlorous acidNegative-pressure wound therapyMultidisciplinary approachMedicineIntensive care medicineChemistryAlternative medicinePolitical sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: HOCl (eg, pHAp) preserved solutions have antimicrobial properties and are considered safe and effective for wound management. NPWTi-d (or NPWTi) is an established adjunctive wound modality for a variety of wound etiologies in various anatomic locations in which an instillate solution dwells on the surface of the wound to assist in wound bed preparation. A variety of solutions have been used, including 0.9% normal saline wound cleansers and antiseptics. pHAp is growing in popularity as the solution of choice for NPWTi-d. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate consensus statements on the use of NPWTi-d with pHAp. METHODS: A 15-member multidisciplinary panel of expert clinicians in the United States, Canada, and France convened in person in April 2023 in Washington, D.C. and/or corresponded later to discuss 10 statements on the use of pHAp with NPWTi-d. The panelists then replied "agree" or "disagree" to each statement and had the option to provide comments. RESULTS: Ten consensus statements are presented, along with the proportion of agreement or disagreement and summary comments. Although agreement with the statements on NPWTi-d with pHAp varied, the statements appear to reflect individual preferences for use rather than concerns about safety or efficacy. CONCLUSION: The consensus indicates that NPWTi-d with pHAp can have a beneficial effect in wound care.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.464
GPT teacher head0.603
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWOUNDS A Compendium of Clinical Research and PracticeSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207