INCIDENCE OF TRAUMA TO ANTERIORS AND ITS ASSOCIATED ETIOLOGICAL RISK FACTORS:
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Aim of this study was to see the incidence of TDIs particularly to anteriors and their associated presenting complaints, etiological and risk factors reported to OPD of Operative Department of De ’Mont Morency College of Dentistry. Methods: A proforma comprising of pre designed questions was used to do a cross- sectional survey, which included all the incoming patients having a history of dental trauma particularly to anterior teeth over a period of 7 months from Jan 2017 till July 2017.Results: Total number of 129 trauma patients were considered. In these patients, 58.9% were males and 40.3% females.10-20 years age group was considered as most common. N= 53.5% patients got greater than normal overjet which is more than half. And competency of lip was found in 67.4% of patients and absent in 31.8% of patients.
 Conclusion: The concept behind studying various etiological and risk factors is to facilitate the planning of preventive measures for traumatic dental injuries.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".