These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

198 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32839037)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Fractional CO
    Karmisholt KE; Taudorf EH; Wulff CB; Wenande E; Philipsen PA; Haedersdal M
    Lasers Surg Med; 2017 Feb; 49(2):189-197. PubMed ID: 27862066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The patient and observer scar assessment scale: a reliable and feasible tool for scar evaluation.
    Draaijers LJ; Tempelman FR; Botman YA; Tuinebreijer WE; Middelkoop E; Kreis RW; van Zuijlen PP
    Plast Reconstr Surg; 2004 Jun; 113(7):1960-5; discussion 1966-7. PubMed ID: 15253184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Reliability of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in Evaluating Linear Scars after Thyroidectomy.
    Chung JH; Kwon SH; Kim KJ; Lee JM; Yoon JM; Cheon JH; Yoon ES; Park SH
    Adv Skin Wound Care; 2021 Jun; 34(6):1-6. PubMed ID: 33979825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Reliability testing of the Matching Assessment using Photographs of Scars App.
    Klotz T; Kurmis R
    Wound Repair Regen; 2020 Sep; 28(5):676-683. PubMed ID: 32347998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Interpretation of the DermaLab Combo® pigmentation and vascularity measurements in burn scar assessment: an exploratory analysis.
    Gankande TU; Duke JM; Wood FM; Wallace HJ
    Burns; 2015 Sep; 41(6):1176-85. PubMed ID: 25703660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. 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]  

  • 28. Incorporation of 3D stereophotogrammetry as a reliable method for assessing scar volume in standard clinical practice.
    Peake M; Pan K; Rotatori RM; Powell H; Fowler L; James L; Dale E
    Burns; 2019 Nov; 45(7):1614-1620. PubMed ID: 31208769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Rating the resolving hypertrophic scar: comparison of the Vancouver Scar Scale and scar volume.
    Nedelec B; Shankowsky HA; Tredget EE
    J Burn Care Rehabil; 2000; 21(3):205-12. PubMed ID: 10850901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Cultural adaptation and validation of Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale for Turkish use.
    Seyyah M; Yurdalan SU
    Burns; 2018 Aug; 44(5):1352-1356. PubMed ID: 29580666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Automated VSS-based Burn Scar Assessment using Combined Texture and Color Features of Digital Images in Error-Correcting Output Coding.
    Pham TD; Karlsson M; Andersson CM; Mirdell R; Sjoberg F
    Sci Rep; 2017 Dec; 7(1):16744. PubMed ID: 29196632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Rasch analysis of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) in burn scars.
    van der Wal MB; Tuinebreijer WE; Bloemen MC; Verhaegen PD; Middelkoop E; van Zuijlen PP
    Qual Life Res; 2012 Feb; 21(1):13-23. PubMed ID: 21598065
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. Reliable scar scoring system to assess photographs of burn patients.
    Mecott GA; Finnerty CC; Herndon DN; Al-Mousawi AM; Branski LK; Hegde S; Kraft R; Williams FN; Maldonado SA; Rivero HG; Rodriguez-Escobar N; Jeschke MG
    J Surg Res; 2015 Dec; 199(2):688-97. PubMed ID: 26092214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale: Translation for portuguese language, cultural adaptation, and validation.
    Lenzi L; Santos J; Raduan Neto J; Fernandes CH; Faloppa F
    Int Wound J; 2019 Dec; 16(6):1513-1520. PubMed ID: 31599117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Quantitative measurement of hypertrophic scar: intrarater reliability, sensitivity, and specificity.
    Nedelec B; Correa JA; Rachelska G; Armour A; LaSalle L
    J Burn Care Res; 2008; 29(3):489-500. PubMed ID: 18388577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Validation of Fespixon in Postoperative Scar Cosmesis Using Quantitative Digital Photography Analysis.
    Huang TR; Chen SG; Chen JC; Liu SC
    Aesthet Surg J; 2023 May; 43(6):NP427-NP437. PubMed ID: 36624624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The reproducibility and clinical utility of the 3D camera for measuring scar height, with a protocol for administration.
    Tyack Z; Simons M; Kimble RM; Muller MJ; Leung K
    Skin Res Technol; 2017 Nov; 23(4):463-470. PubMed ID: 28271550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Values of patients and caregivers for donor site scars: an inter-observer analysis between patients and caregivers and prediction of cosmetic satisfaction.
    Eskes AM; Brölmann FE; van de Kar AL; Niessen FB; Lindeboom R; Ubbink DT; Vermeulen H
    Burns; 2012 Sep; 38(6):796-801. PubMed ID: 22673119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.