MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005815482 · doi:10.5051/jpis.2014.44.6.265

A tribute to Dr. Per-Ingvar Brånemark

2014· article· sv· W2005815482 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tae‐Il Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Periodontal & Implant Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languagesv
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsseointegrationDentistryTributeMedicineImplantPolitical scienceSurgeryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On December 20th of this year, we lost one of the greatest innovators in dental science. Although Dr. Per-Ingvar Branemark was not a dentist but an orthopedic surgeon, his contribution to dental implantology is never to be forgotten. As is well known, while performing orthopedic experiments on rabbit legs in 1952, Dr. Branemark serendipitously discovered that titanium fuses well with bone. What made it possible for him to grasp this new concept, which he later named was his thoroughness in considering every factor in his studies, which most researchers could have easily overlooked under the same circumstances. Nevertheless, Dr. Branemark's ongoing research on osseointegration was not well accepted at first because the mainstream of medical knowledge worked with the assumption that the human body is inhospitable to any kind of foreign material and that it often reacts with inflammation. Not surprisingly, the grant applications for his studies on bone-anchored implants were frequently rejected, which still did not stop him from pursuing his passion. At last, he succeeded in winning funding from the United States National Institutes of Health, and Branemark implants have served as the basis for the field of dental implantology ever since they first expanded the application of osseointegration to dentistry in the 1970s. At the Toronto Osseointegration Conference in 1982, the new technology of machined titanium implants was introduced to all dental communities. After that, more extensive application in clinical settings was possible. Even though Dr. Branemark was not a dentist, he still deserves the greatest respect from researchers in every biomedical field including dentistry, given his tremendous accomplishments of exploring the therapeutic effectiveness of implants and presenting the remarkable treatment modality to dental science. Titanium implants, which were the products of his impressive research performance, boosted by the discovery of osseointegration, have become widely used in dentistry, as well as in general and veterinary medicine. Although we must say farewell to you, Dr. Branemark, we know that you and your legacy will always stay with us.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.302 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Periodontal & Implant ScienceSame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207