204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32839037)
1. 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]
2. How to evaluate scar colour after burn injuries - A clinical comparison of the Mexameter® and the subjective scar assessment (POSAS/VSS).
Bagheri M; von Kohout M; Fuchs PC; Seyhan H; Stromps JP; Lefering R; Opländer C; Schiefer JL
Burns; 2024 Apr; 50(3):691-701. PubMed ID: 38097444
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Investigating the intra- and inter-rater reliability of a panel of subjective and objective burn scar measurement tools.
Lee KC; Bamford A; Gardiner F; Agovino A; Ter Horst B; Bishop J; Sitch A; Grover L; Logan A; Moiemen NS
Burns; 2019 Sep; 45(6):1311-1324. PubMed ID: 31327551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Treatment of burn hypertrophic scar with fractional ablative laser-assisted drug delivery can decrease levels of hyperpigmentation.
Kurup S; Travis TE; Shafy RAE; Shupp JW; Carney BC
Lasers Surg Med; 2023 Jul; 55(5):471-479. PubMed ID: 37051876
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Scarbase Duo(®): Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability and validity of a compact dual scar assessment tool.
Fell M; Meirte J; Anthonissen M; Maertens K; Pleat J; Moortgat P
Burns; 2016 Mar; 42(2):336-44. PubMed ID: 26774602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Predictive validity of short term scar quality on final burn scar outcome using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in patients with minor to moderate burn severity.
Goei H; van der Vlies CH; Tuinebreijer WE; van Zuijlen PPM; Middelkoop E; van Baar ME
Burns; 2017 Jun; 43(4):715-723. PubMed ID: 28040371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reliability of scar assessments performed with an integrated skin testing device - the DermaLab Combo(®).
Gankande TU; Duke JM; Danielsen PL; DeJong HM; Wood FM; Wallace HJ
Burns; 2014 Dec; 40(8):1521-9. PubMed ID: 24630817
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. A systematic review of the quality of burn scar rating scales for clinical and research use.
Tyack Z; Simons M; Spinks A; Wasiak J
Burns; 2012 Feb; 38(1):6-18. PubMed ID: 22047828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Burn Scar Evaluation Using the Cutometer® MPA 580 in Comparison to "Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale" and "Vancouver Scar Scale".
Busche MN; Thraen AJ; Gohritz A; Rennekampff HO; Vogt PM
J Burn Care Res; 2018 Jun; 39(4):516-526. PubMed ID: 29596600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Reliability testing of a new scar assessment tool, Matching Assessment of Scars and Photographs (MAPS).
Masters M; McMahon M; Svens B
J Burn Care Rehabil; 2005; 26(3):273-84. PubMed ID: 15879752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Application of tissue ultrasound palpation system (TUPS) in objective scar evaluation.
Lau JC; Li-Tsang CW; Zheng YP
Burns; 2005 Jun; 31(4):445-52. PubMed ID: 15896506
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A modified Vancouver Scar Scale linked with TBSA (mVSS-TBSA): Inter-rater reliability of an innovative burn scar assessment method.
Gankande TU; Wood FM; Edgar DW; Duke JM; DeJong HM; Henderson AE; Wallace HJ
Burns; 2013 Sep; 39(6):1142-9. PubMed ID: 23433706
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Clinimetric properties of a translated and culturally adapted Norwegian version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale for use in clinical practice and research.
Hjellestad M; Strand LI; Eide GE; Brekke R; Nesheim A; Gjelsvik BEB
Burns; 2021 Jun; 47(4):953-960. PubMed ID: 33139075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Values of a Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale to Evaluate the Facial Skin Graft Scar.
Chae JK; Kim JH; Kim EJ; Park K
Ann Dermatol; 2016 Oct; 28(5):615-623. PubMed ID: 27746642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Ultrasound is a reproducible and valid tool for measuring scar height in children with burn scars: A cross-sectional study of the psychometric properties and utility of the ultrasound and 3D camera.
Simons M; Kee EG; Kimble R; Tyack Z
Burns; 2017 Aug; 43(5):993-1001. PubMed ID: 28238405
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Assessing Scar Outcomes Using Objective Scar Measurement Tools: An Adjunct to Validated Scar Evaluation Scales.
Bernabe RM; Madrigal P; Choe D; Pham C; Yenikomshian HA; Gillenwater J
Plast Reconstr Surg; 2024 Mar; ():. PubMed ID: 38546618
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A study of using a simple 2D image analysis method to monitor the surface area of hypertrophic scars on hand during pressure therapy.
Yu A; Yick KL; Ng SP; Yip J; Chan YF
Burns; 2020 Nov; 46(7):1548-1555. PubMed ID: 32499048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Measurements of scar properties by SkinFibroMeter
Seo SR; Kang NO; Yoon MS; Lee HJ; Kim DH
Skin Res Technol; 2017 Aug; 23(3):295-302. PubMed ID: 27796064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Quantitative measurement of hypertrophic scar: interrater reliability and concurrent validity.
Nedelec B; Correa JA; Rachelska G; Armour A; LaSalle L
J Burn Care Res; 2008; 29(3):501-11. PubMed ID: 18388576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
