Cranial Reossification with Absorbable Plates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of Lactosorb absorbable plates on bone healing across cranial bone defects in the rabbit skull. Two 10-mm diameter parietal skull defects were created in each of 20 rabbits, with one defect being placed on either side of the sagittal suture. In 10 rabbits, an absorbable plate was placed across both the inner and outer cortices of the left defect, and in the other 10 rabbits, an absorbable plate was placed across the outer cortex only of the left defect. The right defect always served as the control side, with no plate being placed across it. Rabbits were killed an average of 25 weeks postoperatively. Areas of reossification in the experimental and control defects of each rabbit were then measured, examined histologically, and compared. Growth across defects spanned by one plate was also compared with growth across defects spanned by two plates. Histologic and statistical analyses revealed no significant differences in reossification between the control and experimental defects in each animal and between the defects spanned by one versus two plates. This study suggests that these copolymer absorbable plates neither inhibit nor facilitate reossification across 10-mm diameter rabbit cranial defects.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".