ArticleHeliyon2024
Analysis of trends and status of evaluation methods in thyroid scar.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparative short- and long-term outcomes of TOETVA, ETGUA, and COT in thyroid cancer: a propensity score-matched study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The incidence of thyroid cancer has increased over the decades, and patients prefer short thin scars after thyroidectomy due to their cosmetic visibility. Several scar assessment methods have been used to determine the most cosmetically optimal surgical method, but a widely accepted measurement tool is still lacking. This study investigates the usage status in the thyroid scar scale according to time, region, and study method. Methods: The authors searched for articles on thyroid scars published between January 2000 and September 2022 in the PubMed database. The study included clinical studies that mentioned thyroid scar and scar scale, excluding articles that did not evaluate neck scars. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 29. Results: A total of 35 studies were included. Among them, 17 used the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), 17 used the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), four used the Manchester Scar Scale (MSS), and four used the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES). VSS and POSAS were the most commonly used scar evaluation methods. VSS tended to be used frequently in Asia, while POSAS was used frequently in Europe and in randomized controlled trials. Conclusion: VSS and POSAS are popular thyroid scar assessment methods, with regional variations. Standardization is needed for meaningful comparisons. Patient's subjective evaluations should be considered, given the cosmetic importance of thyroid scars.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.