PORCELAIN METAL CERAMIC CROWN VERSUS PORCELAIN VENEER
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the success of porcelain metal ceramic crown andporcelain veneer in endodontically treated maxillary central incisor having discoloration. StudyDesign: Expermintal study. Setting: Akhtar Saeed Dental Hospital, Bahria Town, Lahore andde’Montmorency College of Dentistry, Lahore. Period: 1st January 2016 to 30th June 2016.Patients and Methods: This study includes 42 patients. All the patients had ages between35-40 years and either gender. These patients had discolored endodontically treated uppercentral incisor. The patients were randomly divided into two groups to receive either the metalceramic crown or the porcelain veneer. The restorations were given to the patients according tothe following standard protocols. Follow-up examination was determined as set format of study.The results were compiled at the expiry of twelve months. Results: There were 27 femalesand 15 males. The result is obtained 1.1629 which is statistically not significant at p<0.05.Conclusion: Being conservative in tooth reduction, veneer should be preferred while maskingdiscoloration of single anterior tooth instead of full coverage metal ceramic crown.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.002 |
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 it