MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W86700636 · doi:10.5005/jcdp-9-3-64

Dental Age Assessment of 8.5 to 17 Year-old Saudi Children Using Demirjian's Method

2008· article· en· W86700636 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicForensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAge groupsDentistryDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the dental age in Saudi children aged 8.5 to 17 years using the Demirjian method. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Four hundred ninety panoramic radiographs of boys and girls were reviewed retrospectively. All children were placed in the age group closest to their chronological age. The dental age was scored on all seven left mandibular teeth by one examiner. RESULTS: Both boys and girls in age groups nine to 14 years showed advanced dental age compared to their chronological age which was found to be statistically significant except in age groups nine and 13 years. Saudi boys were 0.3 years and Saudi girls 0.4 years ahead, on average, of French-Canadian children as analyzed by the Demirjian method. CONCLUSION: The standard values for French-Canadian children provided by Demirjian vary slightly for application to Saudi children. As a result, new graphs and tables were produced to convert these maturity scores, calculated by the Demirjian method, to the dental age for Saudi children.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.532
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.291 · 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