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 *

276 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8537427)

  • 1. The Vancouver Scar Scale: an administration tool and its interrater reliability.
    Baryza MJ; Baryza GA
    J Burn Care Rehabil; 1995; 16(5):535-8. PubMed ID: 8537427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Reliability of photographic analysis in determining change in scar appearance.
    Crowe JM; Simpson K; Johnson W; Allen J
    J Burn Care Rehabil; 1998; 19(2):183-6. PubMed ID: 9556325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Improved burn scar assessment with use of a new scar-rating scale.
    Yeong EK; Mann R; Engrav LH; Goldberg M; Cain V; Costa B; Moore M; Nakamura D; Lee J
    J Burn Care Rehabil; 1997; 18(4):353-5; discussion 352. PubMed ID: 9261704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. What score on the Vancouver Scar Scale constitutes a hypertrophic scar? Results from a survey of North American burn-care providers.
    Thompson CM; Sood RF; Honari S; Carrougher GJ; Gibran NS
    Burns; 2015 Nov; 41(7):1442-8. PubMed ID: 26141527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. A guide to choosing a burn scar rating scale for clinical or research use.
    Tyack Z; Wasiak J; Spinks A; Kimble R; Simons M
    Burns; 2013 Nov; 39(7):1341-50. PubMed ID: 23768711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. [Influences of follow-up methods on rehabilitation and compliance of patients with severe scar after burns].
    Shi XQ; Zhou Q; Qu YY; Wang X; Zhou D; Yuan R; Cao J; Jiao XC; Ye JL
    Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi; 2019 Jul; 35(7):537-539. PubMed ID: 31357825
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Burn therapists' opinion on the application and essential characteristics of a burn scar outcome measure.
    Forbes-Duchart L; Cooper J; Nedelec B; Ross L; Quanbury A
    J Burn Care Res; 2009; 30(5):792-800. PubMed ID: 19692907
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The evaluation of a clinical scar scale for porcine burn scars.
    Wang XQ; Kravchuk O; Liu PY; Kempf M; Boogaard CV; Lau P; Cuttle L; Mill J; Kimble RM
    Burns; 2009 Jun; 35(4):538-46. PubMed ID: 19201543
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Methods and tools used for the measurement of burn scar contracture.
    Parry I; Walker K; Niszczak J; Palmieri T; Greenhalgh D
    J Burn Care Res; 2010; 31(6):888-903. PubMed ID: 20859215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Reliability and validity testing of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale in evaluating linear scars after breast cancer surgery.
    Truong PT; Lee JC; Soer B; Gaul CA; Olivotto IA
    Plast Reconstr Surg; 2007 Feb; 119(2):487-94. PubMed ID: 17230080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.