Comparative study between two surgical techniques in the treatment and reconstruction of non-melanoma skin tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-melanoma skin tumors (NMSC), predominantly basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), are the most common skin cancers. Despite generally having lower lethality compared to melanoma, their high incidence represents a significant cost to healthcare systems. The main risk factor is exposure to ultraviolet radiation, along with fair skin phenotype, genetic predisposition, age, and immunosuppression. Diagnoses are based on clinical examination, dermatoscopy, histopathology, and immunohistochemistry. The gold standard treatment is surgical excision with safety margins. This study compares the efficacy and safety of two surgical techniques in the treatment and reconstruction of NMSC. The results were based on descriptive and quantitative analysis, association/correlation of the studied variables, histological subtypes, and reconstruction techniques. POSAS and Vancouver scales were used for study validation. Histological subtypes were important for the objectives of these techniques as well as their safety margins.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".