MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963979427 · doi:10.1177/154405910308200709

Occlusal and TMJ Loads in Subjects with Experimentally Shortened Dental Arches

2003· article· en· W1963979427 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yoshinori Hattori, Chiaki Satoh, S Seki, Yoshihiko Watanabe, Yoichiro Ogino, Makoto Watanabe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dental Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsBite force quotientTemporomandibular jointMasticatory forceOrthodonticsDental archArchMedicineMolarJoint (building)DentistryPosterior teethStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To determine whether shortened dental arches (SDAs) cause functional overloading of the teeth and the temporomandibular joints, which has been implicated in periodontal diseases and temporomandibular disorders, we investigated the influences of SDA on occlusal and joint loads. Bite force and masticatory muscle electromyograms were recorded in five dentate subjects who clenched maximally on intra-oral appliances, creating symmetrical SDAs experimentally. Muscular forces estimated from the recorded electromyograms were fed into a finite element jaw model for calculating bite forces and joint loads. Comparison between the measured and the calculated bite forces ensured that the joint loads were representative. The bite force on each tooth increased with missing molar occlusions, while joint loads decreased. The bite force per root surface area was always greatest on the most posterior tooth, and these values were most constant. The findings provide no evidence that SDA causes overloading of the joints and the teeth, which suggests that neuromuscular regulatory systems are controlling maximum clenching strength under various occlusal conditions.

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Citations103
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dental ResearchSame topicTemporomandibular Joint DisordersFrench-language works237,207