MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2760869808 · doi:10.14419/ijdr.v5i2.7090

The positioning of prosthetic Margo against gingival Margo, cause or not, of periodontitis

2017· article· en· W2760869808 on OpenAlexaff
Ilma Robo, Ruzhdie Qafmolla, Shpëtim Qyra, Saimir Heta

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Dental Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOral and gingival health research
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGingival sulcusDentistryMedicineGingival and periodontal pocketOral hygienePeriodontitisSalivaGingivitisGingival marginInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The long, severe contour of prosthetic margo, remnants of cement used for adhesion, these are elements that affect the periodontal status of gingival margo, and then, the care of oral hygiene by the patient, affecting further aggravated gingival infection to fixed further in periodont.Methods: The experiment was conducted in 3 mice, to which were placed metal artificial crowns. It was controlled the effect of the mechanical action of prosthetic margo, established subgingival, agains the marginal gingival tissue.Results: The periodontal status was performed 1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks and 1 month later, after placing the crows. After 2 months, was taken the samples of saliva for laboratory, to analyze the bacterial flora in the areas of the presence of gingival margo at the prosthetic crown.Conclusions: The presence of plaque that is not mechanically disconnected from gingival sulcus, influences the periodontal diseases that shows its characteristics, reflected significantly after 7 days, after 14 days, after 21 days. Signs of gingival inflammation are significant features of the evolution of related of periodontal illness, according to these dates already referred to us above.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.330
GPT teacher head0.624
Teacher spread0.294 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Dental ResearchSame topicOral and gingival health researchFrench-language works237,207