MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141978311 · doi:10.1259/dmfr/28001874

Ameloblastoma in the Hong Kong Chinese. Part 2: systematic review and radiological presentation

2004· review· en· W2141978311 on OpenAlex
D S MacDonald-Jankowski, Rwk Yeung, K M Lee, TK Li

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

VenueDentomaxillofacial Radiology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral and Maxillofacial Pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiological weaponAmeloblastomaMedicinePresentation (obstetrics)RadiodensityPerforationRadiographyDentistryOrthodonticsGeneral surgeryRadiologyMaxilla

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this part of the study was to determine the radiological presentation on conventional radiographs of central ameloblastomas in the Hong Kong Chinese and compare them with other reported series by a systematic review (SR). METHODS: The study had two elements, that of a complete series of all ameloblastomas presenting at a major Chinese maxillofacial surgical unit and a SR. The files of the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of the University of Hong Kong between 1989 and 2000 were reviewed for ameloblastoma cases. The relevant literature was identified by electronic databases, review of citation lists and handsearching of key journals. The principal selection criterion was that the study should represent a complete collection of cases. RESULTS: Only 13 reports gave any radiological details. The present study of the Hong Kong Chinese contained 61 cases. With the exception of radiodensity and shape of radiolucency, the majority of the 13 other reports did not record the other radiological features that could be important in the diagnosis. The present study agreed with the synthesis of the 13 reports with regards to complete radiolucency and cortication of ameloblastomas, but disagreed with regards to other important features. The present study had a significantly higher proportion of unilocular lesions, better marginal definition, and more frequent perforation of the cortex and buccolingual expansion. Nine of the ten maxillary lesions straddled both anterior and posterior sextants with four crossing the midline, whereas only 13 of the 51 mandibular cases affected both sextants, of which eight crossed the midline. The unicystic form, which was most prevalent, appeared significantly more frequently as unilocular radiolucencies in comparison with the non-unicystic forms. The frequencies of unicystic forms and unilocular presentations were significantly greater in the young. The lesions in the young were significantly sited solely in the posterior sextant. The lower border of the mandible was reached and affected by ameloblastoma in 36 cases in the present report. It was displaced and thinned in 15 cases whereas in just five it was at least partially undisplaced with the lesion expanding down past it either buccally or lingually to it. The unicystic form was significantly more associated with root resorption, tooth displacement and crowns of unerupted teeth. CONCLUSIONS: Radiologically, ameloblastomas in the Hong Kong Chinese differ significantly with regards to many features. This can be in part explained by the higher proportion of the unicystic form.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.316 · 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