Evaluation of the outcome of apexogenesis in traumatised anterior and carious posterior teeth using mineral trioxide aggregate: a 5‐year retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of apexogenesis with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) in traumatised anterior and carious posterior teeth over 5 years. A comprehensive chart review was performed to obtain a retrospective of sequential previously completed cases with recalls. Clinical and radiographic data were collected for 97 vital immature teeth (40 traumatised anterior and 57 carious posterior teeth) pulpotomised (partial or full pulpotomy) using MTA with an average follow-up time of 5 years. Chi-squared test and Fisher's exact test were implemented to analyse data. The success rate in anterior teeth and posterior teeth was 82.5% and 96.4% respectively. Crown discolouration was observed in 25 (62.5%) anterior teeth. There was a significant difference between the number of successful and unsuccessful cases (P < 0.05) and there was no correlation between type of treatment and success/failure (P > 0.05). The success rate of apexogenesis using MTA in immature teeth was relatively high.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".