Irrigation rates and handpieces used in prosthodontic and operative dentistry: Results of a survey of North American dental school teaching
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A data baseline on dental cutting methodologies was established by means of a survey of North American dental school teaching. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four North American dental schools were surveyed regarding their recommendations on handpiece usage and coolant flow rates in fixed prosthodontics and operative dentistry. RESULTS: High-speed handpieces were the instruments of choice for tooth preparation in fixed prosthodontics. In operative procedures, recommendations for sole use of the high-speed, the low-speed, or both handpiece types were more uniform. CONCLUSIONS: North American dental schools advocate greater use of high-speed than low-speed handpieces. Although the use of high-speed handpieces predominate in schools in Canada and Puerto Rico, there is a proportionately higher use of low-speed handpieces than in US dental schools. Few (approximately 1 in 5) schools made recommendations on coolant flow rates during cutting procedures.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it