ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Personalized prediction model for scar response after radionuclide therapy: development and validation in a Chinese cohort.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Scarring represents a persistent clinical and psychosocial challenge, with considerable variability in treatment response among patients. While both clinical and morphologic factors can influence outcomes, robust, individualized prediction of scar treatment efficacy remains elusive. Objective: To develop and validate an integrated predictive model for scar treatment outcomes using a combination of clinical and image-derived features in a Chinese cohort, and to translate this model into a web-based calculator for practical clinical application. This model requires validation in other ethnicities. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 117 Chinese patients with scars treated at a single center, dividing them into a training ( Results: Scar height and age (clinical factors) as well as solidity and S_mean (image-derived metrics) were identified as independent predictors of poor treatment outcome. The combined model demonstrated superior discrimination (AUC 0.970 [training], 0.908 [test]), calibration, and clinical utility compared to clinical or image-based models alone. Calibration curves and metrics indicated excellent agreement between predicted and observed probabilities for the combined model. DCA, NRI, and IDI analyses further highlighted the incremental value and net benefit of the integrated approach. A web-based calculator was developed to enable individualized outcome prediction and support clinical decision-making. Conclusion: Integration of clinical and image-derived features enables robust, individualized prediction of scar treatment outcomes in this Chinese cohort. Our validated combined model, accessible via an easy-to-use web-based calculator, may enhance treatment planning, risk stratification, and patient counseling in scar management. Validation in diverse ethnic populations is essential.
Indexed as
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.