MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402724392 · doi:10.1002/lsm.23844

Defining the Treatment Window: Early Versus Late Pulsed Dye Laser Therapy for Posttraumatic and Surgical Scars in Asian Patients

2024· article· en· W4402724392 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Han‐Yuan Chang, Bing‐Qi Wu, Chang‐Cheng Chang, Yu‐Tsung Chen, Yen‐Jen Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueLasers in Surgery and Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScarsMedicineLaser therapySurgeryLaserOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study evaluates the effectiveness of pulsed dye laser (PDL) treatment in early versus late treatment groups for traumatic or postoperative scars. The study aims to determine the threshold between early and late treatment. Additionally, it investigates factors that may influence wound healing outcomes. METHODS: The medical records of 147 patients who underwent PDL treatment at our institution between January 2018 and December 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Inclusion criteria were patients receiving PDL treatment for traumatic or postoperative scars. Out of these patients, we selected those who were willing to receive telephone interviews or re-visit at a scheduled time. Eventually, 52 participants were included in our study. A standardized questionnaire was administered to all participants during telephone interviews, encompassing inquiries regarding their medical history, treatment experiences, and the patient component of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale. Among the enrolled patients, 38 were contacted and interviewed via telephone, while the remaining 14 patients attended follow-up visits where photographs of their current skin condition were captured. The pretreatment and latest follow-up photographs obtained from the clinical database were independently scored in a blinded manner by two dermatologist reviewers using both the Vancouver Scar Scale and the Manchester Scar Scale. RESULTS: Among the 52 patients, 43 (82.7%) were successfully treated with good response. The correlation coefficients between week-to-treatment initiation and posttreatment MSS and VSS among patients with good response were 0.50 (p < 0.001) and 0.46 (p = 0.002), respectively. Given these findings, we established a treatment initiation threshold of 10 weeks, distinguishing patients into early and late treatment groups. The early treatment group showed borderline significantly lower posttreatment MSS and VSS scores than the late treatment group (MSS: 7.5 ± 2.1 vs. 9.3 ± 2.5, p = 0.011; VSS: 2.8 ± 2.0 vs. 4.5 ± 2.3, p = 0.011). Furthermore, both MSS and VSS of posttreatment showed significantly greater improvement in the early treatment group (4.4 ± 1.6 vs. 3.2 ± 1.9; p = 0.03 and 3.8 ± 1.8 vs. 2.8 ± 1.4; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Early intervention using a PDL within 10 weeks post-injury achieved better outcomes in treating traumatic and postoperative scars based on both clinical and patient opinions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 venueLasers in Surgery and MedicineSame topicDermatologic Treatments and ResearchFrench-language works237,207