MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375853280 · doi:10.1111/jopr.13700

Color match of ultra‐translucency multilayer zirconia restorations with different designs and backgrounds

2023· article· en· W4375853280 on OpenAlexaff
Rahab Ghoveizi, Maryam Baghaei, Sara Tavakolizadeh, Farhad Tabatabaian

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Prosthodontics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental materials and restorations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCubic zirconiaCrown (dentistry)Materials scienceDental porcelainDentistryColor differenceMaxillary central incisorIncisorCeramicDental restorationAcrylic resinGold alloyAlloyComposite materialOrthodonticsMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess the color match of ultra‐translucency multilayer zirconia restorations with different designs and backgrounds. Materials and methods Thirty ultra‐translucency multilayer zirconia crown specimens were made in VITA classical shade B2 for a prepared maxillary central incisor. The specimens were divided into three groups based on the restoration design: veneered zirconia with a trestle design (VZT), veneered zirconia with a dentin core design (VZD), and full‐contour zirconia (FCZ). In the groups VZT and VZD, the zirconia specimens were layered with a feldspathic veneering ceramic. The specimens were seated on five different backgrounds: shade B2 composite resin, shade B2 zirconia, copper‐colored metal alloy, silver‐colored metal alloy, and the prepared central incisor. CIELab values of the labial middle sections of the crown specimens were measured with a spectrophotometer. Color differences between the specimens and a shade B2 VITA classical tab (as a control) were calculated from the ΔE*ab formula and compared with an acceptability threshold (ΔE*ab = 3.7) to be clinically explicated. Results Mean ΔE*ab values ranged between 1.17 and 8.48. The restoration design, the background type, and their interaction affected the ΔE*ab (p < 0.001). The mean ΔE*ab values for VZT with all backgrounds and for VZD with the silver‐colored metal background were greater than the threshold (p < 0.001), whereas the mean ΔE*ab values for VZD with the other backgrounds and FCZ with all backgrounds were less than the threshold (p = 1). Conclusions Restoration design and background type affected the color match of ultra‐translucency multilayer zirconia restorations. VZT restorations on all backgrounds and VZD restorations on a silver‐colored metal background showed color mismatches. However, VZD restorations on the other backgrounds and FCZ restorations on all backgrounds demonstrated color matches.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ProsthodonticsSame topicDental materials and restorationsFrench-language works237,207