MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biomechanical Behavior Evaluation of a Novel Hybrid Occlusal Splint-mouthguard for Contact Sports: 3D-FEA

2021· preprint· en· W3207170957 on OpenAlexaff
Les Kalman, Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva, Talita Suelen de Queiroz, João Paulo Mendes Tribst

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Trauma and Treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMouthguardMaterials scienceSplint (medicine)OrthodonticsDisplacement (psychology)von Mises yield criterionDeformation (meteorology)Stress (linguistics)Finite element methodDentistryStructural engineeringComposite materialEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Orofacial injuries are common occurrences during contact sports activities; however, there is an absence of data regarding the performance of hybrid occlusal splint mouthguards, especially during compressive loading. To evaluate the total deformation and stress concentration, a skull model was selected and duplicated to receive two different designs of mouthguard devices: one model received a conventional custom-made mouthguard (MG) with 4-mm thickness and the other received a novel hybrid occlusal splint-mouthguard (HMG) with the same thickness. Both models were subdivided into finite elements. The frictionless contacts were used, and a nonlinear analysis was performed simulating the compressive loading in occlusion. The results were presented in von-Mises stress maps (MPa) and Total Deformation (mm). A higher stress concentration in teeth was observed for the model with the conventional MG, while the HMG design displayed a promising mechanical response with lower stress magnitude. The HMG de-sign displayed a higher magnitude of stress on its occlusal portion than the MG design. The hybrid mouthguard (HMG) reduced (1) jaw displacement during chewing and (2) the generated stresses in maxil-lary and mandibular teeth.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.427
GPT teacher head0.525
Teacher spread0.098 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicDental Trauma and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207