MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415379463 · doi:10.1186/s12903-025-07019-6

Effect of gamma radiation on human enamel chemical and physical properties

2025· article· en· W4415379463 on OpenAlexaff
Pollyanna Nogueira Ferreira da Silva, Maria Carolina Fernandes Barcellos, F. A. L. Costa, C. Silva, Odair Lélis Gonçalez, Vitor Ribeiro Jardim, Gislene Valdete Martins, Nelson Batista de Lima, Grace M. De Souza, Estela Kaminagakura, Rubens Nisie Tango

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Oral Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOral health in cancer treatment
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnamel paintOral and maxillofacial surgeryRadiationGamma rayDental enamelGamma irradiation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gamma radiation is still used in developing countries for head and neck cancer treatment. Irradiated dental enamel undergoes dose-dependent chemical and mechanical changes that can hinder oral rehabilitation. Understanding these processes can be useful to professionals to plan safer long-lasting treatments. This study aimed to evaluate different doses of gamma radiation on the chemical and mechanical properties of human dental enamel. METHODS: Sixty human third molars were divided into six groups (n = 10), according to dose: 0; 20; 40; 50; 60; or 70 Gy, in daily increments of 2 Gy. After irradiation, the composition and carbonate/ phosphate ratio (C: P) were evaluated by Fourier Transformed Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR). X-ray diffraction (XRD) was used to evaluate crystal size (shape factor) and crystallinity. Hardness, elastic modulus, and scratch resistance were measured, and the microstructure was observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Data of C: P, crystallinity (%), shape factor (nm), hardness (VHN - Vickers Hardness Number), and elastic modulus (GPa - Gigapascals) were submitted to analysis of variance and to Tukey's test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: FTIR showed carboxylic acid in the irradiated groups and an increase in C: P for the 70 Gy group (p = 0.015), but with no change in crystalline structure. A significant decrease was observed in the values of hardness (p = 0.0000) and the elastic modulus (p = 0.0000) in the irradiated groups. For scratch test, the 60 and 70 Gy groups showed lower values for initial spallation. SEM showed spaced rounded peaks of enamel prisms in the 60 and 70 Gy groups. CONCLUSIONS: Gamma radiation negatively affected the chemical and physical properties of human enamel. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Plataforma Brasil, CAAE: 66495417.1.0000.007.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.371 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Oral HealthSame topicOral health in cancer treatmentFrench-language works237,207