Bibliographic record
Abstract
Implementation of new therapies is usually governed by financial considerations, so efficacy studies should also include cost comparisons. The cost and effectiveness of mandibular conventional dentures (CD, n = 30) and two-implant overdentures (IOD, n = 30) were compared in elderly subjects. Effectiveness (Oral Health Impact Profile, OHIP-20) and cost were measured up to one year post-treatment. Data for subsequent years were estimated by the Delphi method. Using an average life expectancy of 17.9 years, the equalized annual costs (in Canadian dollars) were $399 for CD and $625 for IOD (p < 0.001), and the equalized annual values for the outcome (OHIP-20) were 47.0 for CD and 31.3 for IOD treatment (p < 0.05). These values translate into a yearly additional cost for IOD treatment of $14.41 per OHIP-20 point. These results are key to the implementation of programs to provide this form of therapy for edentulous adults. KEY WORDS: cost-effectiveness, healthcare economics, elderly, mandible, edentulous, dental
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 | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.363 | 0.245 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".