MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Methods of determining the relationship of the mandibular canal and third molars: a survey of Australian oral and maxillofacial surgeons

2006· article· en· W2102392448 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Dental Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMolarDentistryMandibular canalInferior alveolar nerveOral and maxillofacial surgeryPanoramic radiographMandibular third molarRadiographyOrthodonticsOral and maxillofacial pathologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Surgical extraction of third molars is one of the most common oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures performed and may have a number of associated complications. One of these complications is inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) dysaesthesia or impairment of sensory perception (including paraesthesia and/or anaesthesia). Previous studies assume that most clinicians use various combinations of nine radiologic criteria on panoramic radiographs as indicators of the relationship and, therefore, predictors of the risk of postoperative dysaesthesia. Our study assessed both the current radiologic modalities and assessment criteria used by Australian oral and maxillofacial surgeons when determining the proximity of mandibular canal to third molars. METHODS: A survey of all surgeon members of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (ANZOMS) practising in Australia was undertaken. RESULTS: Of the 105 questionnaires sent to surgeons, 72 responses (68 per cent) were returned. All surgeons reported using the panoramic radiograph but only 25 per cent considered it sufficiently accurate in determining the relationship between the mandibular canal (MC) and the third molar root, while 61 per cent of surgeons use CT for this purpose but the average frequency of use was very low (five per cent). This study also revealed that the nine radiologic criteria on a panoramic radiograph are used to varying extents by Australian surgeons. Nearly all surgeons use 'change in MC direction' and 'MC narrowing' to determine and close relationship. Thirty-one per cent used superimposition of the MC and the root of the third molar alone and 24 per cent used appearance of contact of the root with the MC alone in the absence of any other radiologic criteria to indicate close or intimate relationship. CONCLUSION: Further research is required to determine the accuracy and observer agreement or reliability of using the nine panoramic characteristics, to determine this relationship and whether the presurgical determination of proximity and position (buccal or lingual) of the canal utilizing CT has any usefulness in determining the surgical protocol or affect on postoperative morbidity.

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.290 · 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