Correction to “Reconstructive Therapy of Peri‐Implantitis Following Non‐Surgical Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soldini, M.C., R. Pons, J. Nart, A. Monje, N. Carrió, and C. Valles, “Reconstructive Therapy of Peri-Implantitis Following Non-Surgical Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial,” Clinical Implant Dentistry and Related Research 27 (2025): e70024, 10.1111/cid.70024 In page 13 of the published article in the Acknowledgements section, the original Acknowledgements was inadvertently omitted in the final submission. The text “The authors acknowledge Dr. Cristina Esquinas for her support during data analysis. The study was self-funded. Xenografts and barrier membranes were donated by Straumann,” was incomplete. This should have read: “This work was supported, in part, by 2021 SGR 00626 (Generalitat de Catalunya), SCOI—Study and Control of Oral Infections, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya. The authors acknowledge Dr. Cristina Esquinas for her support during data analysis. The study was self-funded. Xenografts and barrier membranes were donated by Straumann.” We apologize for this error.
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 | 0.032 | 0.190 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.081 | 0.015 |
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".