MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964357718 · doi:10.1111/edt.12104

Intrusive luxation of permanent teeth: a systematic review of factors important for treatment decision‐making

2014· review· en· W1964357718 on OpenAlex
Jasem Dawood AlKhalifa, Abdulaziz A. AlAzemi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDental Traumatology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Trauma and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKuwait University
KeywordsMedicineConfoundingCohortCohort studyQuality of evidenceEvidence-based medicineIntrusionMEDLINEDentistryMeta-analysisSystematic reviewRandomized controlled trialPhysical therapySurgeryAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a literature review and assess the current strength of evidence of the available studies and to investigate factors important for treatment choice. METHODOLOGY: Structured electronic and hand searches were performed, restricted to English records for all age groups. Only cohort studies comparing spontaneous eruption and surgical and orthodontic extrusion were assessed. Risk of bias assessment was made by the method introduced by the Cochrane collaboration and the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies, and the body of evidence was assessed by the GRADE approach. RESULTS: One hundred seventeen studies were identified, but only three were suitable for inclusion; these were not meta-analyzed because of methodological and clinical heterogeneity. Spontaneous eruption had a low failure rate of 5-12%. CONCLUSION: Given that infection can be controlled by endodontic therapy, it appears that spontaneous eruption results in the fewest complications in immature teeth, regardless of the degree of intrusion. Furthermore, there appear to be no significant differences between surgical and orthodontic extrusion in terms of adverse outcomes. Limitations of the majority of current cohort studies include selection bias (no confounding adjustment and no demonstration that outcomes were absent at the start of the study), reporting bias, and no information on whether investigators were blinded from the outcomes assessed. Furthermore, there is a serious indirectness in the current body of evidence regarding each outcome. Therefore, guidelines for treatment are currently not based on strong evidence.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.379 · 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