MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080511507 · doi:10.1002/ar.20408

Osteoclast distribution within the rat interdental septum coincident to experimental tooth movement using light forces

2007· article· en· W2080511507 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Roger B. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Anatomical Record · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsInterdental consonantDental alveolusOsteoclastMolarAnatomyDistribution (mathematics)ChemistryDentistryMedicineInternal medicineMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is little quantitative information concerning the number and distribution of bone-matrix resorbing osteoclasts (BMRO) within the adjacent alveolar bone coincident to tooth movement. We moved the right first maxillary molar tooth anteriorly in 40 female rats (E), the left side was untreated, serving as an internal control (IC). Forty female age and weight matched rats were untreated, serving as external controls (EC). BMRO were identified on periosteal and endosteal surfaces of the interdental septum from 1-5 days after initial force application using the MTB-322 antibody. The number of BMRO at periosteal surfaces of E was greater in IC and EC from 2-5 days (P < 0.001). Similarly, the number of BMRO at endosteal surfaces was greater from 1-5 days (P < 0.001). The number of BMRO at periosteal and endosteal surfaces was greater within E than within EC from 1-5 days (P < 0.001). Outcome data from IC were often significantly different from EC. Our data suggest that relatively low forces increase the number of BMRO, which are not uniformly distributed onto both periosteal and endosteal surfaces. Thus, the interdental septum resorbs at the alveolar wall and within spaces between the trabeculae, which, taken together, results in net removal of bone from areas of compression. These data also suggest that experimental tooth movement produces significant differences in the number and distribution of BMRO within IC and EC. Thus, EC groups should be included in studies of tooth movement.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Anatomical RecordSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207