MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1945559993 · doi:10.1002/cne.23793

Long‐term neuroplasticity of the face primary motor cortex and adjacent somatosensory cortex induced by tooth loss can be reversed following dental implant replacement in rats

2015· article· en· W1945559993 on OpenAlexafffund
Limor Avivi‐Arber, Jye‐Chang Lee, Mandeep Sood, Flavia Lakschevitz, Michelle Fung, Maayan Barashi‐Gozal, Michael Glogauer, Barry J. Sessle

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Comparative Neurology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSomatosensory systemNeuroplasticityImplantMotor cortexTonguePrimary motor cortexMedicineBiologyDentistryNeuroscienceStimulationSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tooth loss is common, and exploring the neuroplastic capacity of the face primary motor cortex (face-M1) and adjacent primary somatosensory cortex (face-S1) is crucial for understanding how subjects adapt to tooth loss and their prosthetic replacement. The aim was to test if functional reorganization of jaw and tongue motor representations in the rat face-M1 and face-S1 occurs following tooth extraction, and if subsequent dental implant placement can reverse this neuroplasticity. Rats (n = 22) had the right maxillary molar teeth extracted under local and general anesthesia. One month later, seven rats had dental implant placement into healed extraction sites. Naive rats (n = 8) received no surgical treatment. Intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) and recording of evoked jaw and tongue electromyographic responses were used to define jaw and tongue motor representations at 1 month (n = 8) or 2 months (n = 7) postextraction, 1 month postimplant placement, and at 1-2 months in naive rats. There were no significant differences across study groups in the onset latencies of the ICMS-evoked responses (P > 0.05), but in comparison with naive rats, tooth extraction caused a significant (P < 0.05) and sustained (1-2 months) decreased number of ICMS-defined jaw and tongue sites within face-M1 and -S1, and increased thresholds of ICMS-evoked responses in these sites. Furthermore, dental implant placement reversed the extraction-induced changes in face-S1, and in face-M1 the number of jaw sites even increased as compared to naive rats. These novel findings suggest that face-M1 and adjacent face-S1 may play a role in adaptive mechanisms related to tooth loss and their replacement with dental implants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Comparative NeurologySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207