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 *

161 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9934638)

  • 1. Scar assessment: current problems and future solutions.
    Powers PS; Sarkar S; Goldgof DB; Cruse CW; Tsap LV
    J Burn Care Rehabil; 1999; 20(1 Pt 1):54-60; discussion 53. PubMed ID: 9934638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Burn scar assessment: A systematic review of objective scar assessment tools.
    Brusselaers N; Pirayesh A; Hoeksema H; Verbelen J; Blot S; Monstrey S
    Burns; 2010 Dec; 36(8):1157-64. PubMed ID: 20488623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A clinimetric overview of scar assessment scales.
    van der Wal MB; Verhaegen PD; Middelkoop E; van Zuijlen PP
    J Burn Care Res; 2012; 33(2):e79-87. PubMed ID: 22249102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Burn scar assessment: a systematic review of different scar scales.
    Brusselaers N; Pirayesh A; Hoeksema H; Verbelen J; Blot S; Monstrey S
    J Surg Res; 2010 Nov; 164(1):e115-23. PubMed ID: 20828761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Changes in subjective vs objective burn scar assessment over time: does the patient agree with what we think?
    Martin D; Umraw N; Gomez M; Cartotto R
    J Burn Care Rehabil; 2003; 24(4):239-44; discussion 238. PubMed ID: 14501421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Current scales for assessing human scarring: a review.
    Durani P; McGrouther DA; Ferguson MW
    J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg; 2009 Jun; 62(6):713-20. PubMed ID: 19303834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Acne Scars: How Do We Grade Them?
    Clark AK; Saric S; Sivamani RK
    Am J Clin Dermatol; 2018 Apr; 19(2):139-144. PubMed ID: 28891036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Objective assessment of burn scar vascularity, erythema, pliability, thickness, and planimetry.
    Oliveira GV; Chinkes D; Mitchell C; Oliveras G; Hawkins HK; Herndon DN
    Dermatol Surg; 2005 Jan; 31(1):48-58. PubMed ID: 15720096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Subjective Tools for Burn Scar Assessment: An Integrative Review.
    da Costa PTL; Echevarría-Guanilo ME; Gonçalves N; Girondi JBR; Gonçalves ADC
    Adv Skin Wound Care; 2021 Jun; 34(6):1-10. PubMed ID: 33979826
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Skin scar preconceptions must be challenged: importance of self-perception in skin scarring.
    Brown BC; Moss TP; McGrouther DA; Bayat A
    J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg; 2010 Jun; 63(6):1022-9. PubMed ID: 19501559
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluating Current Scar Assessment Methods.
    Lipman K; Wang M; Berthiaume E; Holloway J; Da Lio A; Ting K; Soo C; Zheng Z
    Ann Plast Surg; 2020 Feb; 84(2):222-231. PubMed ID: 31688125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Standardized assessment of breast cancer surgical scars integrating the Vancouver Scar Scale, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, and patients' perspectives.
    Truong PT; Abnousi F; Yong CM; Hayashi A; Runkel JA; Phillips T; Olivotto IA
    Plast Reconstr Surg; 2005 Oct; 116(5):1291-9. PubMed ID: 16217470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.