Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Attainment of primary soft tissue closure at the time of guided bone regeneration (GBR) therapy often requires significant crestal repositioning of the buccal mucoperiosteal flap, resulting in compromise of the buccal vestibule and loss of mucogingival confluence in the area. The everted flap technique (EFT) is used at the time of extraction of teeth demonstrating bone loss beyond their apices and complete epithelialization of the extraction socket. The EFT uses the tissues within the extraction socket as part of the buccal mucoperiosteal flap, thus obviating the need for crestal mucoperiosteal flap repositioning after placement of regenerative material and covering membranes. Case Presentation: Out of 118 patients treated using the EFT in the authors' private practices, one primary case and two supplementary cases are presented here. Soft tissue primary closure was attained and maintained throughout the course of regeneration in all patients. No patients required repositioning of a buccal mucoperiosteal flap at a second surgical visit to reform the buccal vestibule and/or reestablish mucogingival confluence in the area. Conclusion: The EFT offers a means by which to help attain passive soft tissue primary closure after GBR therapy without crestal repositioning of the buccal mucoperiosteal flap and to lessen the need for buccal soft tissue repositioning.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".