MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116340780 · doi:10.61882/wjps.14.3.70

Comparing the Effects of Mitomycin-C and Triamcinolone-Acetonide Injections on Hypertrophic Scars and Keloids in Burn Patients

2025· article· en· W7116340780 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWORLD JOURNAL OF PLASTIC SURGERY · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAhvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsKeloidHypertrophic scarsScarsHypertrophic scarAcne scars

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Hypertrophic scars (HTS) and keloids are the proliferative responses of the fibroblastic. Surgical excision lead to changes, but postoperative recurrence rate seems to be still high. The topical use of mitomycin C (MMC) has been thus documented to suppress fibroblast proliferation. We aimed to investigate the effects of MMC injection on HTS and keloids in burn wounds, and compare the results with intralesional Triamcinolone Acetonide (TAC) injection in with regard to scar size reduction. Methods: This randomized clinical trial was conducted on 90 burn patients (divided into two groups) with hypertrophic scars and keloids at Taleghani Burn Hospital, Ahvaz, Iran, in 2023. Patients were randomly assigned to receive intralesional MMC (0.4 mg/dL) or TAC (0.4 mg/dL). Scar characteristics were assessed pre- and post-treatment using the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) over six months. Results: The average size of the scars at the pre- and post-intervention stages was 15.71 and 4.81 mm. No significant difference was observed between both groups. Effect of MMC was over and above TAC. There was a significant difference between both groups. Significant difference was found between the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) mean scores before and after the intervention, so the TAC value was greater than that of MMC, and the scores at the pre- and post-intervention stages were significantly different. Conclusion: MMC and TAC were considered as effective methods for HTS and keloid management. In spite of this, the VSS scores and the scar size denoted that MMC was much more effective in the treatment of such scars than TAC.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.274
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