MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015803087 · doi:10.1080/03014460701556296

Effects of nutrition on timing of mineralization in teeth in a Peruvian sample by the Cameriere and Demirjian methods

2007· article· en· W2015803087 on OpenAlexaff
Roberto Cameriere, Carlos Flores‐Mir, Franco Mauricio, Luigi Ferrante

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Human Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDentistryMedicineMalnutritionDemographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Few studies have been conducted among children to investigate the effects of malnutrition and race on the timing of tooth formation. AIM: The study investigated whether there is a significant association between nutritional status, gender, and the process of tooth mineralization. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Orthopantomograms of 287 Peruvian schoolchildren, aged 9.5-16.5 years, were evaluated. For each individual, we considered the number of the seven right permanent mandibular teeth, with completely closed apical ends of roots (N0), sum of normalized open apices (S), and the Demirjian score (Ds). We also estimated individual age by the Cameriere and Demirjian methods, and assessed their accuracy. RESULTS: For each age class, the distributions of N0, S and Ds in the two sub-populations of Peruvian children, undernourished and well nourished, were not statistically significant. The mean error (ME) in age estimation was 0.75 and 1.31 years for the Cameriere and Demirjian methods, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Nutrition did not seem to affect the process of tooth growth. As regards the accuracy of age estimation, the Cameriere method yielded more accurate estimates than the Demirjian method.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations118
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Human BiologySame topicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology StudiesFrench-language works237,207