Dental treatment approaches under general anesthesia in children with cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate dental treatment approaches under general anesthesia in children with cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: DMF-T values of existing decay, missing and filled teeth of 68 pediatric patients receiving active cancer treatment were recorded. Systemic and physical examinations of patients were performed by a paediatrician. İntraoral and extraoral examinations of children were performed by pediatric dentists. The dental treatment plan encompasses the child's individualized oral health needs. Dental procedures are generally performed in the controlled environment of a hospital operating room under general anaesthesia. Analyzes were made with SPSS 25.0 package program. RESULTS: The study determined that the average age was 6.47±2.93. In this study, extraction-focused treatments were used instead of restorative (r=0.346, p=0.01) and endodontic treatments (r=0.274, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the development of restorative and endodontic treatments under general anaesthesia, even pediatric crown applications, radical decisions must be made to control the medical condition of patients with childhood cancers.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".