Impaired bone healing at tooth extraction sites in CD24-deficient mice: A pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To use a micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) to quantify bone healing at maxillary first molar extraction sites, and test the hypothesis that bone healing is impaired in CD24-knockout mice as compared with wild-type C57BL/6J mice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Under ketamine-xylazine general anaesthesia, mice had either extraction of the right maxillary first molar tooth or sham operation. Mice were sacrificed 1 (n = 12/group), 2 (n = 6/group) or 4 (n = 6/group) weeks postoperatively. The right maxillae was disected. Micro-CT was used to quantify differences in bone microstructural features at extrction sites, between CD24-knockout mice and wild-type mice. RESULTS: CD24-Knockout mice displayed impaired bone healing at extraction sites that was manifested as decreased trabecular bone density, and decreased number and thickness of trabeculae. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that CD24 plays an important role in extraction socket bone healing and may be used as a novel biomarker of bone quality and potential therapeutic target to improve bone healing and density following alveolar bone injury.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".