Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes a method used for the fabrication of a two-piece denture obturator for a patient who had surgical removal of the premaxilla due to squamous cell carcinoma. The patient had been wearing a two-piece obturator but encountered difficulty in inserting the prosthesis. In this case report, a lock-and-key mechanism was used to easily assemble the two-piece prosthesis intraorally. A keyhole was designed on the obturator to act as the lock while the denture was used as the key that fitted into the keyhole. This mechanism facilitated insertion and provided retention for the prosthesis. Heat-cured resilient acrylic material (Molloplast B®), which was used to fabricate the obturator, was a nonirritant, nontoxic, tissue-compatible material. It also did not contain plasticizers, therefore eliminating the problems associated with leaching out of plasticizers. The use of this flexible and resilient material allowed the obturator to engage in the undercuts without causing trauma and irritation to the soft tissues in the region of the defect. To conclude, the “lock-and-key” mechanism used in the fabrication of the two-piece denture obturator provided the patient with a lightweight, comfortable, and user-friendly form of prostheses.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".