Mandibular lengthening in a juvenile camel by distraction osteogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary A three-year old bactrian camel was surgically treated by means of distraction osteogenesis for the correction of a severe mandibular brachygnathia. The mandible was osteotomized in two fragments at the diastema. An external fixator frame, composed of five 1/3rd rings connected by three connecting bars and two transporting rods, was used to achieve stability and optimize sequential fragment distraction during bone healing. After a period of four months, adequate healing had occurred and 35 mm of new bone had formed. Although a significant lengthening was accomplished, the final result was not optimal. We describe the technique used and discuss the suitability and limitations of this technique for its use in large animals. Mandibular lengthening by means of distraction osteogenesis is described in a juvenile camel. Bone lengthening was accomplished over a period of time making this technique suitable for large animal species. However structural adjustments to the external lengthening device are necessary to obtain optimal results.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".