Examining the Factors Affecting Endodontic Therapy Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to examine the factors affecting Endodontic Therapy Failure (ETF). The study was descriptive cross-sectional conducted at College of Dental Science & Research Centre. Dental school in Pune, India. In the present study, 90 patients were analyzed in the treatment ward. According to the results, the highest endodontic failure was observed in 41-50 years age group (41.11%) and the least was in 21-30 (24.44%). According to the tooth type, most endodontic failures were observed in maxillary molars (44.4%), mandibular molars (20%) and maxillary premolars (15.5%). Endodontic treatment by general dental practitioners (GDPs) showed the highest failure rate (78.8%). The factors contributing to the most common endodontic problems were under-filled canals (33.3%) and unfilled and missed canals (17.7%). The study concluded that ETF occurred when the treatment was not according to the accepted standards. The main causes of ETF are microbial infection in the root canal system and these patients' not attending the specialists.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".