MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079464676 · doi:10.1902/jop.2000.71.3.335

Comparison of Morphological Measurements Extracted From Digitized Dental Radiographs With Lumbar and Femoral Bone Mineral Density Measurements in Postmenopausal Women

2000· article· en· W2079464676 on OpenAlexaff
Michael K. Shrout, Charles F. Hildebolt, Brad J. Potter, T.K.B. Brunsden, Thomas K. Pilgram, Mary Dotson, Naoko Yokoyama‐Crothers, J. Hauser, S. Cohen, E. Kardaris, Roberto Civitelli, P. J. Hanes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Periodontology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsGeorgian College
FundersCore Research for Evolutional Science and TechnologyNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineBone mineralRadiographyDental alveolusOsteoporosisLumbar spineDentistryLumbarBone densityPopulationNuclear medicineOrthodonticsRadiologySurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We set out to determine whether morphologic measurements extracted from digitized images of bite-wing radiographs correlated with lumbar and femoral bone mineral density (BMD) measurements in 45 postmenopausal women who had no or only mild periodontal disease (no probing depths >5 mm). METHODS: Lumbar spine and femoral BMDs were determined by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Vertical bite-wing radiographs were taken and digitized. Crestal and apical regions of interest (ROIs) were drawn on the digital images of the maxillary and mandibular alveolar bone on the patient's right and left sides. For each patient, a single morphologic measurement was made for each of 8 ROIs. Correlation analysis was performed to determine the strengths of the relationships between the morphologic measurements made at the 8 locations and between these morphologic measurements and BMD measurements. RESULTS: The correlations (r) between the morphologic operator (MO) measurements and lumbar spine and femoral BMDs were weak (mean r = 0.02, range = 0.32 to -0.26) and not statistically significant, with no clear trends discernible. Correlations between MO measurements made at the 8 alveolar sites were also weak (mean r = 0.05, range = 0.35 to -0.38) and not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The MO measurements used in this study were weakly correlated with lumbar spine and femoral BMDs, with no clear trends discernible in this population of postmenopausal women with no or mild periodontal disease.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations42
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PeriodontologySame topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207