MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2494691123 · doi:10.1177/0898756416660008

Morphologic and Morphometric Description of the Temporomandibular Joint in the Domestic Dog Using Computed Tomography

2016· article· en· W2494691123 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lenin A. Villamizar-Martinez, Cristian Villegas, Marco Antônio Gioso, Alexander M. Reiter, Geni Cristina Fonseca Patricio, Ana Carolina Brandão de Campos Fonseca Pinto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Dentistry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemporomandibular jointCondyleMedicineFossaMandible (arthropod mouthpart)AnatomyComputed tomographyTemporal boneOrthodonticsDentistryRadiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The temporomandibular joint (TMJ) in the domestic dog is a synovial joint with 2 articular surfaces, the mandibular fossa of the squamous portion of the temporal bone and the articular head of the condylar process of the mandible. Although different diagnostic imaging techniques have been used to study the TMJ in dogs, morphologic and morphometric studies based on computed tomography (CT) are scarce. The purpose of the present study was to describe the morphologic and morphometric features of the TMJ in domestic dogs using CT. Width and depth of the mandibular fossa and 2 different angles between the mandibular fossa and the condylar process were measured in 96 TMJs of 48 dogs of different breeds (Labrador retriever, German shepherd, cocker spaniel, boxer, English bulldog, pug, shih tzu, and Cavalier King Charles spaniel). Temporomandibular joint conformation differed between breeds. Mid- and small-sized dogs had mandibular fossae that were more shallow, less developed retroarticular processes, and irregularly shaped condylar processes. The TMJs were more congruent in large dogs, presenting with deeper mandibular fossae, prominent retroarticular processes, and more uniform condylar processes. The measurements proposed in this study demonstrated 3 different morphologic conformations for the TMJ in the dogs of this study.

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)0.002
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 score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary DentistrySame topicTemporomandibular Joint DisordersFrench-language works237,207