Prevalence of Traumatic Dental Injuries in Patients Attending University of Alberta Emergency Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the prevalence of dental trauma for patients attending the emergency dental clinic at the University of Alberta Hospital between 2006-2009. Patients' examination and treatment charts were reviewed. METHODS: Total number of patients' charts was 1893.The prevalence of different types of trauma was 6.4 % of the total cases (117 patients). Trauma cases were identified according to Ellis classification and as modified by Holland et al., 1988. RESULTS: Logistic statistical model showed that 21.7% were Ellis class I trauma, 16.7% were Ellis class II trauma, and 6.7% were Ellis class III. In addition, 11.7 % presented with avulsion, 7.5 % presented with dentoalveolar fracture and 7.5% presented with sublaxation. Also, 17.55 % presented with tooth displacement within the alveolar bone, 3.3 % presented with crown fracture with no pulp involvement, 4.16 % presented with crown fracture with pulp involvement and 3.3 % presented with root fracture. In conclusion, the general prevalence of dentoalveolar trauma in patients attending the emergency clinic at the University of Alberta is less than other reported percentages in Canada or other countries.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".