Study on skin pigmentation following burn and skin grafting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating the relevant factors that affect skin graft changes in color over time in burned children have yet to be published OBJECTIVE: To conduct a study evaluating the skin color of infants victims of burns, and to follow how it evolves throughout time. The study will concern burned skin, grafted skin, skin where the graft was harvested and sane skin as a reference for comparison. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We will first have the acceptance of the local ethics committee. Children will be recruited during their routine appointments. A consent form will in all cases be signed by the child’s representative. The skin analysis will be done throughout the use of the Vancouver Scar Scale, the Fitzpatrick scale, a dermatospectrometer and laser Doppler Imaging. Measurements will compare the grafted skin to the contralateral sane body part, and then the graft’s donor sites. RESULTS: Due to the sanitary context of the year 2020, only very partial measurements have been realized, mostly because the physiotherapists responsible for the measurements were not available. Therefore, there is no exploitable data to be analyzed at this point in time. Even though, the ethics committee agreement and the materials necessary to the study are ready and will allow us to begin as soon as the situation normalizes. CONCLUSION: The study will follow its course in the upcoming years, and later results should prompt a publication if they offer viable insight on the subject.
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".