MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562132379 · doi:10.1038/sj.ebd.6401203

No confidence that success rates of self-drilling and self-tapping insertion techniques of orthodontic mini-implants are similar

2016· letter· en· W2562132379 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Reint Meursinge Reynders, G. Cacciatore

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Dentistry · 2016
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTappingInsertion timeDentistryOrthodonticsDrillingConfidence intervalMedicineSurgeryEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.277
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.652
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.892

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2770.652
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.027
Bibliometrics0.0170.013
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.011
Open science0.0080.005
Research integrity0.0100.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based DentistrySame topicOrthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsFrench-language works237,207