MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806503896 · doi:10.1111/jopr.12912

Prevention and Management of Cheek and/or Tongue Biting Related to Posterior Implant‐Supported Fixed Dental Prostheses (ISFDPs)

2018· article· en· W2806503896 on OpenAlex
Kelvin I. Afrashtehfar, Urs C. Belser

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Prosthodontics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersInternational Team for Implantology
KeywordsMedicineDentistryOrthodonticsOcclusionOverbiteDental occlusionImplantMalocclusionSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After the loss of several adjacent posterior teeth, bone resorption occurs that can lead to a marked occlusal discrepancy between arches. This discrepancy may originate from the more pronounced resorption at the facial portion of the alveolar bone crest, often resulting in a more palatal implant position. Therefore, establishing normal overbite and cusp-fossa relation may become difficult, namely causing inappropriate crown contours and emergence profiles. This manuscript describes a technique in which a different occlusal configuration is given to solve some problems that edge-to-edge occlusal configuration produces. For instance, patients may suffer from cheek and/or tongue biting after the delivery of a maxillary posterior implant-supported fixed dental prosthesis resulting in an edge-to-edge occlusal configuration. In instances of severe maxillary resorption in the posterior buccal zone, it is recommended to consider a distinct cross-bite occlusion and by this prevent the well-known discomfort and clinical signs associated with both an edge-to-edge interarch relationship or a so-called "stretched" transversal overbite.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.317 · 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