MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3157410853 · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-88513-z

Trabecular and cortical mandibular bone investigation in familial adenomatous polyposis patients

2021· article· en· W3157410853 on OpenAlexafffund
Camila Pachêco‐Pereira, Yuri Silvestre-Barbosa, Fabiana T. Almeida, Hassem Geha, André Ferreira Leite, Eliete Neves Silva Guerra

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsCortical boneFamilial adenomatous polyposisMedicineBiologyAnatomyColorectal cancerInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mandibular cortical and trabecular bone abnormalities in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) were evaluated using dental panoramic radiographs (DPR) radiomorphometric indices and fractal dimension (FD). Sixty DPRs from 15 FAP patients and 45 healthy controls were evaluated. FAP group was composed of 33.3% females and 66.6% males, agemean = 37.2 years (SD 15.79). The non-FAP group was paired by gender and sex. The parameters analyzed were: FD of the trabecular bone in four regions of interest (ROI), mandibular cortical index (MCI) and width (MCW). FD values were lower for the FAP group. Statistically significance differences were shown by ROI 2 and 3 anteriorly to the mental foramen bilaterally, p = 0.001, and p = 0.006. The ROI 1 and 4, at the mandibular angle trabeculae, indicated statistical significances on the right side (p = 0.036) and no differences on the left side (p = 0.091). There was no significant difference in MCI and MCW when the groups were compared, MCW (L) p = 0.247, and MCW (R) p = 0.070. Fractal values of FAP patients' mandibular trabecular bone were lower than healthy controls. The radiomorphometric indices MCI and MCW were not useful for analyzing the cortical bone pattern. Therefore, FD is a promising tool for detection of abnormal bone structure in DPRs and for supporting the appropriate referral of FAP patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer→French-language works237,207→