A novel experimental model for studying transverse orthodontic tooth movement in the rat mandible
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To establish a rat model of a one-piece mandible using the principles of gingivoperiosteoplasty and guided bone regeneration to fuse the midline symphyseal area. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-four Sprague-Dawley female rats were divided into two groups: 12 experimental and 12 control. Both groups were imaged using in vivo micro-computed tomography at baseline and at end point (5 months). The experimental group received regenerative surgery at the symphysis area; the control group received no treatment. Outcomes were evaluated by radiographic examination of gross and volumetric bony changes in the symphyseal region of interest marked between the mental foramina bilaterally and the two central incisors near the most coronal margin of the alveolar crests. These landmarks were chosen as they can be reproduced on the computed tomography images at baseline and end point. Histologic examination was performed on all samples at a level 5 mm apical to the alveolar bone crest. RESULTS: Radiologic and histologic examinations of the experimental group revealed complete bony fusion of the symphyseal area in three subjects, partial fusion in five subjects, and thickening of the alveolar bony socket in three subjects; one rat died of anesthesia-related complications. No evidence of fusion or alveolar bone thickening was found in any of the controls. CONCLUSIONS: This surgical animal model demonstrates that a rat mandible can be surgically manipulated to mimic the one-piece human mandible. This novel model may prove useful in studying mandibular bone remodeling and orthodontic mandibular tooth movement.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".