Value of preoperative mandibular plating in reconstruction of the mandible
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative versus intraoperative mandibular contouring using rapid prototyping technology. METHODS: Ten patients requiring mandibular reconstruction had a preoperative mandibular plate contoured to a fabricated 3D mandibular model based on preoperative imaging. A traditional intraoperative plate was also contoured. Two surgeons blinded to the study compared the plates with respect to conformance, surface-area contact, and best overall match. A cost-benefit analysis was then performed. RESULTS: The average time to contour was 867 ± 243 seconds and 833 ± 289 seconds for the preoperative and intraoperative plates, respectively (p = .83). Interobserver analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in conformance (p = .38) or surface area contact (p = .14). In 7 of 9 cases, the preoperative plate was selected for the final reconstruction. In 1 case, an intraoperative plate was not contoured because of the lateral extent of the tumor. CONCLUSION: In cases of mandibular distortion secondary to disease, pathologic fracture or defects involving multiple mandibular subsites this method is particularly advantageous.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it