Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the principal features of "glandular odontogenic cyst" (GOC), by systematic review (SR), and to compare their frequencies among four global groups. METHODS: The databases searched were the PubMed interface of MEDLINE and LILACS. Only those reports of GOCs that occurred in a series in the reporting authors' caseload were considered. All cases were confirmed histopathologically. RESULTS: 18 reports on 17 series of consecutive cases were included in the SR. GOC affected males twice as frequently and the mandible almost three times as frequently. The mean age at first presentation was 44 years, coincident with that of the Western global group, in which the largest proportion of reports and cases first presented in the second half of the fifth decade. However, age at presentation of GOCs in the East Asian and sub-Saharan African global groups was nearly a decade younger, this was significant. Six reports included details of at least one clinical presentation. Eight reports included at least one conventional radiological feature. There were some significant differences between global groups. The Western global group had a particular predilection for the anterior sextants of both jaws. The sub-Saharan African group displayed buccolingual expansion (as did the Latin American group) and tooth displacement in every case. 18% of GOCs recurred overall, except in the sub-Saharan African global group. CONCLUSIONS: GOCs have a marked propensity to recur in most global groups. GOCs presented in older patients and with swellings, affected the anterior sextants of both jaws, and radiologically were more likely to present as a well-defined unilocular radiolucency with buccolingual expansion. Tooth displacement, root resorption and an association with unerupted teeth occurred in 50%, 30% and 11% of cases, respectively.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".