Contemporary diagnosis and management of dental erosion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This article is aimed at providing an overview of the topic of erosive tooth wear (ETW), highlighting the clinical signs, diagnosis, and management of dental erosion. OVERVIEW: With the increased prevalence of ETW, it is important that oral health professionals are able to recognize the early signs. Early clinical signs of dental erosion are characterized by loss of enamel texture, a silky glossy appearance, and sometimes a dulling of the surface gloss, referred to as the "whipped clay effect, cupping, and restorations 'standing proud'." The progression of ETW should be monitored by means of diagnostic models or clinical photographs. ETW can be as a result of acid attack of extrinsic or intrinsic origin. CONCLUSION: There is an increase of ETW that is being recognized by the profession. The first step in diagnosing and management is to recognize as early as possible that the process is occurring. At that point a determination of whether the primary etiology is either intrinsic or extrinsic should be made. If these findings are confirmed, appropriate prevention, and management strategies can be adopted followed by appropriate restorative therapy. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The prevalence of ETW continues to increase. It is therefore important that oral health care providers have a better understanding of the etiology, pathophysiology, and management of this condition. This review aims to provide the guidelines for diagnosis and management of dental erosion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".