MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cone‐Beam CT for Preoperative Implant Planning in the Posterior Mandible: Visibility of Anatomic Landmarks

2008· article· en· W1970770030 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueClinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisibilityMandible (arthropod mouthpart)MedicineCone beam ctImplantOrthodonticsCone beam computed tomographyDentistryComputed tomographyRadiologySurgeryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The technical development has given a new type of modality, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). This technique has a high potential to solve different diagnostic problems among which is preoperative planning for implants in the posterior mandible. PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the visibility of the mandibular canal and the marginal bone crest and the agreement between observers in images from one CBCT technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients were examined with 3D Accuitomo (J. Morita Mfg. Corp., Kyoto, Japan) in one side of the mandible, where the second premolar and molars were lost. The examined volume was 30 by 40 mm. Seven observers evaluated the visibility and the location of the mandibular canal and the marginal crest by visually deciding if the structures were clearly visible, probably visible, or invisible in one cross-sectional image, approximately 1 cm posterior to the mental foramen. In a later session, the observers also marked the two anatomic structures. If the decision was not "clearly visible" or if the anatomic structures were difficult to identify, the observers had to use other cross-sectional, axial, and/or sagittal images in the volume. RESULTS: The confidence among the observers evaluating the marginal bone crest was high. Two observers never used any other images, and the rest took help in two to seven cases. When marking the mandibular canal, the observers, in general, used more images. In five cases (17%), all the observers only used the single cross-sectional image. The agreement on the position of the canal was also high. CONCLUSION: With this CBCT modality (3D Accuitomo), the visibility of the mandibular canal and the marginal crest, as well as the observer agreement of the location of these structures, was high. Hence, the 3D Accuitomo can be recommended for implant planning in the posterior mandible.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.345 · 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