302 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28238405)
21. Ultrasound assessment of scald scars in Asian children receiving pressure garment therapy.
Cheng W; Saing H; Zhou H; Han Y; Peh W; Tam PK
J Pediatr Surg; 2001 Mar; 36(3):466-9. PubMed ID: 11226998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. A clinimetric assessment of the validity and reliability of 3D technology for scar surface area measurement.
Doomen MCHA; Rijpma D; Pijpe A; Meij-de Vries A; Niessen FB; Karaoglu S; de Vet HCW; Gevers T; van Zuijlen PPM
Burns; 2023 May; 49(3):583-594. PubMed ID: 36764836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 3D photography is as accurate as digital planimetry tracing in determining burn wound area.
Stockton KA; McMillan CM; Storey KJ; David MC; Kimble RM
Burns; 2015 Feb; 41(1):80-4. PubMed ID: 24877886
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Comparison between high-frequency ultrasonography and histological assessment reveals weak correlation for measurements of scar tissue thickness.
Agabalyan NA; Su S; Sinha S; Gabriel V
Burns; 2017 May; 43(3):531-538. PubMed ID: 28109548
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Transepidermal water loss measured with the Tewameter TM300 in burn scars.
Gardien KL; Baas DC; de Vet HC; Middelkoop E
Burns; 2016 Nov; 42(7):1455-1462. PubMed ID: 27233677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. An effective procedure for skin stiffness measurement to improve Paediatric Burn Care.
Elrod J; Müller B; Mohr C; Meuli M; Mazza E; Schiestl C
Burns; 2019 Aug; 45(5):1102-1111. PubMed ID: 30833098
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The Intra-rater reliability and validity of ultrasonography in the evaluation of hypertrophic scars caused by burns.
Lee SY; Cho YS; Kim L; Joo SY; Seo CH
Burns; 2023 Mar; 49(2):344-352. PubMed ID: 35459576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. In a clinimetric analysis, 3D stereophotogrammetry was found to be reliable and valid for measuring scar volume in clinical research.
Stekelenburg CM; Jaspers ME; Niessen FB; Knol DL; van der Wal MB; de Vet HC; van Zuijlen PP
J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Jul; 68(7):782-7. PubMed ID: 25817943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Reliability of Repeated Measurements on Post-Burn Scars with Corneometer CM 825(®).
Anthonissen M; Daly D; Peeters R; Van Brussel M; Fieuws S; Moortgat P; Flour M; Van den Kerckhove E
Skin Res Technol; 2015 Aug; 21(3):302-12. PubMed ID: 25382262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Reproducibility of repeated measurements on post-burn scars with Dermascan C.
Van den Kerckhove E; Staes F; Flour M; Stappaerts K; Boeckx W
Skin Res Technol; 2003 Feb; 9(1):81-4. PubMed ID: 12535289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Detection of changes of scar thickness under mechanical loading using ultrasonic measurement.
Li JQ; Li-Tsang CW; Huang YP; Chen Y; Zheng YP
Burns; 2013 Feb; 39(1):89-97. PubMed ID: 22763366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Direct comparison of reproducibility and reliability in quantitative assessments of burn scar properties.
Baumann ME; DeBruler DM; Blackstone BN; Coffey RA; Boyce ST; Supp DM; Bailey JK; Powell HM
Burns; 2021 Mar; 47(2):466-478. PubMed ID: 32839037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Health professionals' and consumers' opinion: what is considered important when rating burn scars from photographs?
Simons M; Tyack Z
J Burn Care Res; 2011; 32(2):275-85. PubMed ID: 21233729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Reliability and Photographic Equivalency of the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating (SCAR) Scale, an Outcome Measure for Postoperative Scars.
Kantor J
JAMA Dermatol; 2017 Jan; 153(1):55-60. PubMed ID: 27806156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Objective measurement of scarring by multiple assessors: is the tissue tonometer a reliable option?
Corica GF; Wigger NC; Edgar DW; Wood FM; Carroll S
J Burn Care Res; 2006; 27(4):520-3. PubMed ID: 16819358
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Cesarean section scar measurements in non-pregnant women using three-dimensional ultrasound: a repeatability study.
Glavind J; Madsen LD; Uldbjerg N; Dueholm M
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol; 2016 Jun; 201():65-9. PubMed ID: 27064944
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Evaluating accuracy and reliability of active stereophotogrammetry using MAVIS III Wound Camera for three-dimensional assessment of hypertrophic scars.
Su S; Sinha S; Gabriel V
Burns; 2017 Sep; 43(6):1263-1270. PubMed ID: 28363664
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Exploring reliability of scar rating scales using photographs of burns from children aged up to 15 years.
Simons M; Ziviani J; Thorley M; McNee J; Tyack Z
J Burn Care Res; 2013; 34(4):427-38. PubMed ID: 23271058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Objective Burn Scar Assessment in Clinical Practice Using the Cutometer©: Introduction and Validation of a Standardized Measurement Protocol.
Klimitz FJ; Neubauer H; Stolle A; Ripper S; Daeschler SC; Aman M; Boecker A; Thomas B; Kneser U; Harhaus L
J Burn Care Res; 2023 Jan; 44(1):95-105. PubMed ID: 36300728
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Determination of inter-rater reliability in pediatric burn scar assessment using a modified version of the Vancouver Scar Scale.
Forbes-Duchart L; Marshall S; Strock A; Cooper JE
J Burn Care Res; 2007; 28(3):460-7. PubMed ID: 17438503
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
