MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410798148 · doi:10.7759/cureus.85000

Investigating the Efficacy of Layered Moderate Tension Reduction Suturing in Facial Aesthetic Surgery

2025· article· en· W4410798148 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jin Y Gang, Yan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Sutures and Adhesives
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineReduction (mathematics)SurgeryTension (geology)AestheticsGeneral surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the efficacy of the layer-by-layer moderate tension reduction suture technique in head and facial aesthetic plastic surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 80 patients who underwent head and facial cosmetic and plastic surgery in the outpatient department of our hospital from April 2022 to April 2024. Among these, the experimental group received the layer-by-layer moderate tension reduction suture technique, whereas the control group received the traditional suture technique. The incidence of surgical complications, scar width, and scar quality metrics derived from the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The experimental group had a longer operation time but no complications (0%), compared to the control group's 17.5% complication rate. The χ² test confirmed the experimental group's significantly lower complication rate (P < 0.05). At one, three, six, and 12 months postoperatively, the experimental group had significantly smaller scar widths, lower POSAS scores, and lower VSS scores compared to the control group (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The layer-by-layer moderate tension reduction suture technique demonstrated substantial advantages in head and facial aesthetic plastic surgery. It effectively minimized surgical complications, reduced scar width, and enhanced patients' scar appearance scores, making it highly worthy of clinical promotion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureusSame topicSurgical Sutures and AdhesivesFrench-language works237,207