Remineralization of natural early caries lesions in vitro by P<sub>11</sub>‐4 monitored with photothermal radiometry and luminescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim The efficacy of self‐assembling peptide P11‐4 to regenerate enamel in natural early caries lesions was evaluated over 50 days by photothermal radiometry and luminescence using The Canary System (CS) and The Canary Lab (CL). Methods Baseline readings for sound and carious sites on smooth surfaces of extracted teeth were obtained by scanning with CS and CL. Teeth were then randomly assigned to a treatment group (TG, treated with P11‐4), a placebo group (PG, same vehicle as treatment group without P11‐4), or a control group (CG, no treatment). All the teeth were then placed in artificial saliva to facilitate natural remineralization, and the sites were rescanned with CS and CL at 7, 14, 30, and 50 days. Results For carious sites in TG, mean canary numbers (CN) derived from CS decreased significantly (P<.01) from 44±3.8 at baseline to 24±4.9 at day 50; the mean CN for the TG derived from CL also decreased significantly (P<.05), from 65 at baseline to 45 at day 50. In contrast, no significant changes in CN were observed for carious sites in the CG or PG using either CS or CL. Conclusions P11‐4 promoted the regeneration of early caries.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".