MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414877611 · doi:10.1002/hsr2.71110

Short‐Term Effects in the Treatment of Episiotomy Dehiscence in Physiotherapy: A Novel Approach in a Case Series Report

2025· article· en· W4414877611 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lucia Martinez‐Torres, Samuel Fernández‐Carnero, Kenneth Jhonson, Mary M. Austin, Mercedes Furio‐Valverde

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Science Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpisiotomySeries (stratigraphy)Clinical trialDehiscenceMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background and Aims Dehiscence is defined as the appearance of a hole or gap between the sutured edges of the episiotomy of more than 0.5 cm. Episiotomy is a technique in which an incision is made in the perineum to reduce the incidence of severe perineal tears. The two most used are the midline in the USA and Canada and the postero‐lateral incision in Europe. In cases where the mother's BMI exceeds 35 kg/m 2 , the risk of infection and dehiscence increases. Reoperation is the usual choice and may be accompanied by other symptoms such as purulent discharge in 22.2%, perineal pain in 23.6% and 26.2% suffering from both. Radiofrequency and magnetotherapy are common treatments in physiotherapy that have been shown to have positive effects on tissue regeneration with indications for scarring processes. Methods/Results The following case series report proposes a detailed treatment protocol for episiotomy dehiscence with excellent results and no adverse effects in all cases. All patients had a 50% pain relief and total recovery in 1 week. Conclusions This is a novel treatment which needs future clinical trials to evaluate, analyze, and determine its effectiveness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Science ReportsSame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207