The Study of Inferior Alveolar Canal at the Lower Third Molar Apical Region With Cone Beam Computed Tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to determine the distance between the impacted mandibular third molar (IMTM) and the inferior alveolar canal (IAC) at different reference points through panoramic radiographs and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: A total of 45 male and 45 female patients with bilateral IMTM at a mean age of 27 years were recruited for this study. With the aid of panaromic radiographs and CBCT, the mandible width, the buccal bone width, IAC width, the lingual bone width, IAC height, the alveolar bone height, and the distance from the lowest part of the IMTM to the superior border of the canal were measured. Statistical analysis was done with independent samples t -test and Mann-Whitney U test for finding the difference between genders. Paired t -test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used for comparing both sides at P value = 0.05. Results: The mandible width, IAC width, and IAC height were different between male and female patients. The IMTM roots displayed intimate contact with the IAC in 96.67% of the cases. The location of the IAC was mostly lingual in both genders. The diameter of the IAC was significant larger in men compared to in the women in terms of width and height. Conclusions: This study is useful for the dental surgeon to avoid or prevent postoperative numbness or pain, because the awareness of the common location of the IAC and its approximation with the IMTM roots could allow a more cautious and precise approach during IMTM intervention. J Clin Med Res. 2019;11(5):353-359 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jocmr3794
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 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 | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".