Characterization of root surface periodontal ligament following avulsion, severe intrusion or extraction: preliminary observations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study employed novel topographic and histological techniques to assess remaining periodontal ligament (PDL) in a convenience sample of avulsed and intruded human permanent incisors and extracted premolars. Seventeen human teeth (eight avulsed, five severely intruded and four uninjured extracted) were evaluated for the distribution and physical characteristics of adherent root surface PDL. The topographic distribution of PDL was assessed by staining roots with malachite green and determining the proportion of remaining PDL within selected regions on four aspects of each tooth. In order to characterize mechanical damage to PDL, serial transverse sections of roots were stained with hematoxylin and eosin and examined at magnifications of 40x to 800x. The sections were photographed and imaging software was used to calculate the percentage of remaining PDL in the circumference of each root section. Topographic analysis demonstrated that 54% of the PDL remained on roots of avulsed and severely intruded incisors and 36% of the PDL remained on the extracted single-rooted premolars. Examination of serial transverse root sections revealed that 58% of the PDL remained on roots of avulsed or severely intruded incisors and 54% on extracted premolars. Avulsed and severely intruded incisors demonstrated similar amounts of retained PDL. In both injuries, almost half of the root surface was denuded of PDL.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".