MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107145442 · doi:10.1111/edt.12230

Fracture resistance of simulated immature tooth roots reinforced with <scp>MTA</scp> or restorative materials

2015· article· en· W2107145442 on OpenAlex
Meriç Karapınar Kazandağ, Bettina Basrani, Valerie Tom‐Kun Yamagishi, Amir Azarpazhooh, Shimon Friedman

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

VenueDental Traumatology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicEndodontics and Root Canal Treatments
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMineral trioxide aggregateCalcium hydroxideUniversal testing machineFracture (geology)DentistryRoot canalMaterials scienceReinforcementChemistryComposite materialMedicineUltimate tensile strength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND/AIM: Immature endodontically treated teeth may require reinforcing to reduce the risk of root fracture. This study assessed the fracture resistance of simulated immature tooth roots reinforced with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) or two composite resin (CR) materials. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred extracted roots of mature human maxillary incisors were decoronated and sectioned 9 mm further apically from the decoronation line and randomly divided into five groups (n = 20). In Group 1 (negative control), roots received no treatment. In groups 2-5, canals were enlarged to 2.1 mm diameter to simulate immature roots, dressed with calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2 ) and incubated for 7 days. After removal of Ca(OH)2 , canals in Group 2 (positive control) were left unfilled. Canals in groups 3, 4 and 5 were filled with MTA, BisFil 2B flowable CR or BisFil II posterior CR, respectively. After further incubation for 30 days, specimens were embedded in acrylic cylinders and horizontally loaded in a universal testing machine at cross head speed of 5 mm min(-1) until fracture occurred. Load (N) at and pattern of fracture were recorded. RESULTS: Load at fracture was significantly lower (t-test, P = 0.003) in Group 2 (630 ± 199.12) than in Group 1 (896.98 ± 311.79). It did not differ significantly among groups 1, 3, 4 and 5 (anova, P > 0.07). Pattern of fracture did not differ among the groups either. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, root canal filling with MTA and two CR materials affected reinforcement of simulated immature roots to levels comparable with intact roots.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.263 · 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