MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2353520780

Intraoral incision for mandibular angle reduction osteoplasty under endoscope

2010· article· en· W2353520780 on OpenAlexaff
LV Jin-ling, Chen Nai-li

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Journal of Aesthetic Medicine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsCredit Valley Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandibular angleEndoscopeMandible (arthropod mouthpart)OsteotomyOrthodonticsReduction (mathematics)MedicineDentistryMolarSurgeryMathematicsGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Due to structural limitations,surgical vision and operation of space is more limited,we hope that with endoscopic techniques to explore a kind of operating under direct vision method of mandibular angle plastic surgery though intraoral approach.Methods Design drawing lines,grinding thinning outer mandibular plates,curved hypertrophy of the mandibular angle resection and slope trimming marginal mandibular was employed for prominent mandibular angle though intraoral approach under endoscope so that the mandible in the three-dimensional reduced.Results Since 2005,256 cases whe were subject to prominent mandibular angle underwent curved mandible angle osteotomy though intraoral approach under endoscope.All cases gained more beautiful facial contour.Conclusion ① full-mouth incision into the road surface will not leave behind any traces of surgery.②endoscopic design drawing lines,accurate and symmetry;surgical operations were carried out under direct vision,safe and reliable.③surgical removal of hypertrophy of the jaw with curved angle,so that the natural curvature of the mandibular angle perfect;complete mandibular thinning outer plate so that the integrity of the front face reduced;fine finishing marginal mandibular,so that the entire lower jaw is more smooth contours of soft parts,which face the middle and lower parts of three-dimensional to effectively narrowed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.310 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Journal of Aesthetic MedicineSame topicFacial Rejuvenation and Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207