MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391783427 · doi:10.1016/j.joen.2024.02.002

Long-Term Outcome of Horizontal Root Fractures in Permanent Teeth: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2024· article· en· W4391783427 on OpenAlexaff
Mahshid Sheikhnezami, Reza Shahmohammadi, Hamid Jafarzadeh, Amir Azarpazhooh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endodontics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Trauma and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyDentistryPulp necrosisCoronal planeDental traumaCohortTrauma centerLogistic regressionPulp (tooth)SurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Horizontal root fracture (HRF) is a complex traumatic dental injury that affects the pulp, dentin, cementum, and periodontal ligament. This retrospective cohort study evaluated treatment outcomes in permanent teeth with HRF. METHODS: We analyzed clinical and radiographic data from a dental trauma center (2006-2022). Permanent teeth with HRF with a follow up of ≥12 weeks were considered for outcome assessment (defined as clinical normalcy and radiographic healing at the fracture line). Prognostic factors were identified through multivariable logistic regression analyses (P value ≤ .05). RESULTS: 125 teeth from 103 patients were included. After a median follow-up of 79 weeks, the overall favorable outcome was 92%. This includes teeth that received emergency splinting/repositioning at baseline (62.2%) and those that received subsequent endodontic intervention for the coronal fragment (baseline: 85%; subsequent follow-ups: 91.8%). Being male and incomplete root development were both significantly associated with a better outcome of splinting/repositioning (OR = 2.58; 95% CI, 1.06-6.24 and OR = 4.37; 95% CI, 1.16-16.41, respectively) and a reduced likelihood of requiring endodontic treatment (OR = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20-0.96 and OR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.08-0.76, respectively). Treatment delays surpassing one week were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of requiring endodontic treatment compared to timely presentations within 24 hours (OR = 3.06; 95% CI, 1.07-8.77; P value < .05). CONCLUSION: With timely diagnosis and treatment, and close monitoring, HRF cases can achieve a 92% favorable outcome. Male sex and incomplete root development correlate with improved baseline outcomes and a reduced need for endodontic treatment. Conversely, delayed presentation increases the likelihood of requiring endodontic intervention.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.402 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EndodonticsSame topicDental Trauma and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207