MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113965373 · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1632819

Mandibular fracture repair in dogs and cats using epoxy resin and acrylic external skeletal fixation

2004· article· en· W2113965373 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Trauma and Fracture Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Social FundUniversity of BristolMcGill University
KeywordsMedicineNeurovascular bundleCATSOcclusionFixation (population genetics)DentistryMandible (arthropod mouthpart)Mandibular fractureSurgeryImplantOral and maxillofacial surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Mandibular fractures in 17 dogs and in eight cats were managed using external skeletal fixation (ESF) with acrylic or epoxy resin connecting bars. In order to maintain dental occlusion during fracture repair pha- ryngostomy or tracheostomy was performed in 12 dogs and in six cats to permit inhalational anaesthesia during surgery. All of the fractures healed with the exception of fractures in two dogs. Mandibular external skeletal fixation was well tolerated and there was not any evidence of iatrogenic damage to teeth nor to neurovascular structures within the mandible. Implant loosening was commonly observed at the time of fixator removal, but it did not affect the outcome.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.260 · 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