Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the principal features of fibrous dysplasia (FD) by systematic review (SR) and to compare their frequencies between four global groups. METHODS: The databases searched were the PubMed interface of Medline and LILACS. Only those reports of FD which occurred in a series in the reporting authors' caseload were considered. All cases were confirmed fibro-osseous lesions histopathologically. The SR-included series must also have included radiographs. RESULTS: Of the 106 reports considered (including the Hong Kong report), 31 reports and a total of 788 cases were included in the SR. 11 SR-included series were in languages other than English. FD affected both genders equally, but was 50% more prevalent in the maxilla. The mean age at first presentation was 24 years. The decade with the greatest frequency was the second, in which males accounted for 63%. The main symptom in 90% of all SR-included cases was swelling (including deformation of the jaws). Not one SR-included case directly involved the ocular apparatus. All cases displayed buccolingual expansion; all mandibular cases exhibited downward displacement of the lower border of the mandible and almost all maxillary cases involved the maxillary antrum. Only 35% of reports included follow-up; 18% of cases recurred or were reactivated. Not one case displayed sarcomatous change. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term follow-up of large series that would have revealed the long-term outcomes of FD was lacking. This is necessary because many cases do not burn out at the end of adolescence, as expected of a hamartoma, but are reactivated.
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 | 0.008 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.023 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".