MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191191269 · doi:10.3390/ph14080752

Nanoparticles in Dentistry: A Comprehensive Review

2021· review· en· W3191191269 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

VenuePharmaceuticals · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMedicineDentistryStomatitisOral CancersOral cavityDermatology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, nanoparticles (NPs) have been receiving more attention in dentistry. Their advantageous physicochemical and biological properties can improve the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of numerous oral diseases, including dental caries, periodontal diseases, pulp and periapical lesions, oral candidiasis, denture stomatitis, hyposalivation, and head, neck, and oral cancer. NPs can also enhance the mechanical and microbiological properties of dental prostheses and implants and can be used to improve drug delivery through the oral mucosa. This paper reviewed studies from 2015 to 2020 and summarized the potential applications of different types of NPs in the many fields of dentistry.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.007

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 head0.302
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.235 · 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