MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005568346

Resolution of Maxillary Sinus Mucositis after Endodontic Treatment of Maxillary Teeth with Apical Periodontitis: A Cone-beam Computerized Tomography Pilot Study

2011· dissertation· en· W7005568346 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace (University of Toronto) · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeriapical periodontitisMaxillary sinusMucositisPosterior teethAnterior teethPeriodontitisHigh resolutionEndodontic therapy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study characterized maxillary sinus mucositis (SIMS) adjacent to teeth with apical periodontitis (AP), and assessed its resolution three months after endodontic treatment. 29 subjects who maxillary posterior teeth with AP were imaged with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Resolution of SIMS was assessed with CBCT three months after treatment, and periapical healing was assessed using the PAI after six months. Four non-compliant subjects were discontinued and SIMS was identified in 14/25 subjects (56%). Three months post-treatment, SIMS was resolved fully in 3/10 subjects (30%), and partially in 3/10 subjects (30%). Six months post-treatment, 6/10 subjects (60%) were classified as healed or healing. CBCT revealed a lower-than-expected prevalence of SIMS adjacent to teeth with AP. In specific cases SIMS might linger beyond three months after the elimination of the endodontic infection. Due to the low statistical power, association between the resolution of SIMS and periapical healing could not be explored.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace (University of Toronto)Same topicSinusitis and nasal conditionsFrench-language works237,207