Clinical Performance of Pedo Jacket Crowns in Maxillary Anterior Primary Teeth.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSES: To assess the clinical performance of Pedo Jacket crowns for restoration of carious primary anterior teeth. METHODS: A total of 129 carious primary incisors and canines of 48 children younger than 71 months of age- were restored with Pedo Jacket crowns and resin-modified glass ionomer cementation. They were assessed for: ease of use; presence of recurrent decay; wear; partial or complete loss of the crown; color stability; gingival health; and overall clinical success over a 12-month follow-up. The patient's behavior at the restorative appointment during crown placement was also assessed. RESULTS: An overall clinical success of 89.5 percent of the teeth in 87.3 percent of the children was seen one year later. The crowns were easy to use, even in uncooperative children. The color stability, wear, plaque accumulation, and gingival health were acceptable. Discoloration, wear, or complete loss of the crown were found in 13.1 percent, 5.4 percent, and 7.6 percent of children, respectively. Although not statistically significant, failures were associated with poor patient cooperation at the time of crown placement, poor oral hygiene, or operator error. CONCLUSION: Pedo Jacket crowns are a viable treatment alternative for carious maxillary primary anterior teeth.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".