MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196027490 · doi:10.2341/20-062-c

Longevity of Crown Margin Repairs Using Glass Ionomer Cement: A Retrospective Study

2021· article· en· W3196027490 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOperative Dentistry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlass ionomer cementDentistryProportional hazards modelMedicineCrown (dentistry)Survival analysisMargin (machine learning)PopulationOrthodonticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the survival time of crown margin repairs (CMRs) with glass ionomer and resin-modified glass ionomer cements on permanent teeth using electronic dental record (EDR) data. METHODS: We queried a database of EDR (axiUm; Exan Group, Coquitlam, BC, Canada) in the Indiana University School of Dentistry (IUSD), Indianapolis, IN, USA, for records of patients who underwent CMRs of permanent teeth at the Graduate Operative Dentistry Clinic. Two examiners developed guidelines for reviewing the records and manually reviewed the clinical notes of patient records to confirm for CMRs. Only records that were confirmed with the presence of CMRs were retained in the final dataset for survival analysis. Survival time was calculated by Kaplan-Meier statistics, and a Cox proportional hazards model was performed to assess the influence of age, gender, and tooth type on survival time (a<0.05). RESULTS: A total of 214 teeth (115 patients) with CMR were evaluated. Patient average age was 69.4 ± 11.7 years old. Posterior teeth accounted for 78.5% (n=168) of teeth treated. CMRs using glass ionomer cements had a 5-year survival rate of 62.9% and an annual failure rate (AFR) of 8.9%. Cox proportional-hazards model revealed that none of the factors examined (age, gender, tooth type) affected time to failure. CONCLUSION: The results indicate the potential of CMRs for extending the functional life of crowns with defective margins, thus reducing provider and patient burden of replacing an indirect restoration. We recommend future studies with a larger population who received CMR to extend the generalizability of our findings and to determine the influence of factors such as caries risk and severity of defects on survival time.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.301 · 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