Histologic Comparison of Light Emitting Diode Phototherapy-Treated Hydroxyapatite-Grafted Extraction Sockets: A Same-Mouth Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The stimulating effect of red and near-infrared (NIR) laser phototherapy on bone regeneration and growth has been shown in a number of in vitro and animal studies. However, the effect of NIR phototherapy on the bone regeneration of hydroxyapatite (HA) -treated extraction sockets has not been previously demonstrated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An investigational Biolux extraoral light emitting diode phototherapy device was used daily for 21 days postextraction and socket grafting with HA (Osteograf LD300) unilaterally. Bone regeneration of the phototherapy-treated and nontreated side was compared in same-mouth extraction sockets. RESULTS: Histologic evaluations showed enhanced bone formation and faster particle resorption associated with the phototherapy-treated socket graft compared with the non-phototherapy-treated socket. CONCLUSIONS: The accelerated bone healing in the phototherapy-treated HA socket graft may provide faster implant placement compared to non-phototherapy-treated socket grafts.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".