Biomarkers to predict the onset of biphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw: A systematic review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The goal of this paper was to identify available biomarkers to predict the onset of biphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Case-control studies comparing the different concentrations of a series of molecules detected in serum and urine as matrices of BRONJ affected patients vs. non-affected were included. PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews were used for the present paper. Two reviewers independently screened electronic databases (Medline, Web of science, and The Cochrane Library) and performed hand searches. Risk of bias assessment of selected studies was performed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017078149. RESULTS: From a total of 601 identified studies, 7 (4 articles with high methodological quality and 3 with medium) articles were included. They investigate 2623 patients, of whom 91 (3.47%) developed BRONJ. A total of 7 biomarkers were identified and classified into 3 groups: bone turnover, angiogenesis and endocrine markers. Conflicting results were found in relation to most biomarkers. CONCLUSIONS: The present review suggests that no useful markers are currently available to evaluate BRONJ risk. Nevertheless, the present paper indicates that a paradigm shift from bone turnover biomarkers to angiogenesis and endocrine markers could shed light on this search.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it