MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138148902 · doi:10.1902/jop.2005.76.5.821

Treatment Options Following Single‐Rooted Tooth Removal: A Literature Review and Proposed Hierarchy of Treatment Selection

2005· review· en· W2138148902 on OpenAlexaff
Paul A. Fugazzotto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Periodontology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMilton District Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)HierarchyMedicineDentistryComputer scienceEconomicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alveolar bone changes following tooth extraction have been well documented and have given rise to a number of treatment approaches. Included in these approaches are placement of various grafting materials, immediate implant placement, and a combination of both. METHODS: A review of all pertinent literature discussing regenerative therapy at the time of tooth extraction or immediate implant placement with or without concomitant regenerative therapy was carried out. RESULTS: A clinically-based hierarchy of treatment selection following extraction of single rooted teeth is proposed, based upon the available literature and clinical experience. The role of patient phenotype is considered. CONCLUSION: Utilization of the proposed hierarchy of treatment selection affords a logical framework within which to predictably treat a variety of patients.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PeriodontologySame topicDental Implant Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207