MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Differences in photodynamic therapy exposure time and Staphylococcus aureus counts

2018· article· en· W2890165568 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adeline Jovita Tambayong, Ira Widjiastuti, Cecilia G.J. Lunardhi

Bibliographic record

VenueDental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicEndodontics and Root Canal Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaphylococcus aureusBacteriaPhotodynamic therapyNutrient agarMicrobiologyAgar platePathogenic bacteriaStaphylococcusAgarColony-forming unitMicroorganismMedicineBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The success of endodontic treatment can be achieved when pathogenic bacteria are eliminated from the root canal and periapical tissue resulting in healing of such tissue. One of the bacteria located in root canals is Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) reportedly found to be in severe periapical abscesses. Photodynamic therapy is one current technology that can help eliminate microorganisms without causing damage to human body cells. Average of research has been conducted using different tools and bacteria to evaluate the effects of exposure time used in photodynamic therapy on the number of bacteria. Purpose: The research reported here aimed to determine the correlation between the exposure time of photodynamic therapy and the number of S. aureus bacteria. Methods: The S. aureus bacteria used in this research were divided into seven treatment groups: a control group and six treatment groups with respective exposure times of 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 and 60 seconds. All of the bacteria were administered a photosensitiser and radiated according to the treatment intended for each group. They were then planted in nutrient agar and incubated for 48 hours. The colonies of bacteria formed were calculated using the Quebec colony counter and subsequently analyzed by means of both Kruskal Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests. Results: After calculating the number of bacterial colonies, the average number of Staphylococcus aureus bacteria in the non-irradiated group was 119 CFU/ml, 29 CFU/ml in the group with a 10-second exposure time, 20 CFU/ml in the group with a 20-second exposure time, 13 CFU/ml in the group with a 30-second exposure time, 7 CFU/ml in the group with a 40-second exposure time, but none in the groups with exposure times of 50 or 60 seconds. Conclusion: The longer the photodynamic therapy exposure time, the greater the number of S. aureus bacteria eliminated. An exposure time of 50 seconds was found to be sufficient to exterminate all S. aureus bacteria present.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi)Same topicEndodontics and Root Canal TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207