MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943686024 · doi:10.1177/205016841600500110

Dry Mouth and Clinical Oral Dryness Scoring Systems

2016· article· en· W2943686024 on OpenAlexaff
Piali Das, Stephen Challacombe

Bibliographic record

VenuePrimary Dental Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSalivary Gland Disorders and Functions
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDry mouthDrynessFeelingOral healthDentistryMedicineSalivaPsychologySocial psychologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dry mouth or xerostomia is the feeling that there is not sufficient saliva in the mouth. If this is present all or most of the time then it can be uncomfortable. It can also sometimes indicate health problems and as a result should be brought to the attention of a health care professional. Xerostomia does not always equate to hyposalivation. There are ways to assess degrees of oral dryness, namely-CODS (clinical oral dryness scoring) which helps to give a numerical value to the oral signs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.005

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrimary Dental JournalSame topicSalivary Gland Disorders and FunctionsFrench-language works237,207