MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014214161 · doi:10.1111/jopr.13170

Dimensional Changes of Yttria‐stabilized Zirconia under Different Preparation Designs and Sintering Protocols

2020· article· en· W3014214161 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Prosthodontics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Implant Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaKing Abdulaziz University
KeywordsMaterials scienceSinteringCubic zirconiaFabricationYttria-stabilized zirconiaComposite materialTitaniumFinish lineCoping (psychology)Offset (computer science)CeramicMetallurgyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To evaluate the linear and volumetric dimensional changes that occur throughout the fabrication process of monolithic 4.5-6% yttria-stabilized zirconia copings under the influence of different preparation designs and two sintering protocols. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A titanium master die was fabricated using Atlantis core file implant-abutment. Six copings were designed virtually according to different finish line offsets and coping thicknesses, with four equidistant occlusal posts for linear measurements. Zirconia copings were milled using IPS e.max ZirCAD LT zirconia blanks. The experimental groups according to the coping designs were the following: G1: 0.5 mm finish line offset, 0.5 mm thickness; G2: 0.5 mm finish line offset, 1.0 mm thickness; G3: 0.5 mm finish line offset, 1.5 mm thickness; G4: 1.2 mm finish line offset, 0.5 mm thickness; G5: 1.2 mm finish line offset, 1.0 mm thickness; G6: 1.2 mm finish line offset, 1.5 mm thickness. Six samples per group were sintered by standard sintering (SS) and the other six by fast sintering (FS). Linear and volumetric measurements were taken at the three fabrication stages (virtual design, milling stage, and sintering) by using an intraoral scanner and imported as the .stl file to Meshmixer software for analysis. Statistical analysis was performed by a linear mixed effect model via statistical software R (R Core team, 2018). RESULTS: There was a significant interaction between the coping design group, stage of fabrication and sintering protocol on the linear (F = 4.451, p < 0.001) and volumetric (F = 2.716; p < 0.001) dimensional changes. Standard sintering G1 showed the smallest linear and dimensional changes among the groups compared to the reference design. Sintered copings had shrunk on average 1.32% within SS and 1.54% within FS linearly and 3.82% within SS and 3.90% within FS volumetrically compared to the initial design parameters. CONCLUSION: The linear and volumetric dimensional changes did not differ significantly between standard and fast sintering protocols, and the preparation designs had more influence on the dimensional changes compared to sintering protocols.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.240 · 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