Idiopathic noncondylar hemimandibular hyperplasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A female patient with 'idiopathic non-condylar hemimandibular hyperplasia' was followed from the age of 7.5-11.5 years. This rare disorder was characterised by an increase in volume of the right inferior ramus and mandibular body. It also included accelerated development and eruption of the teeth on the affected side, but no indication of enlargement of the condyle or the condylar neck. To date, review of the literature revealed several cases of hemimandibular hyperplasia and unilateral condylar hyperplasia, both of which present with enlargement of the condyle. However, the patient differed significantly from any previously reported cases, since she had no enlargement of the condyle. The above mentioned patient also differed from patients with hemihypertrophy, since the teeth were accelerated in development, but not hyperplastic. In addition, from histopathologic and radiographic examinations, as well as an angiogram, benign fibro-osseous and vascular lesions of the mandible were excluded. Although this is a single case report and neither the aetiology nor the pathogenesis is yet understood, it may suggest a new disorder of the mandible. Therefore, future reporting of similar cases should be encouraged.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".