Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Bitemark interpretation assumes that the human dentition is unique and that its attributes can be accurately transferred to skin. A cadaver model was used to investigate whether the correct biter could be determined from similarly aligned dentitions once the dentitions were impressed in human skin. One-hundred dental stone models, which were measured and determined to be unique, were divided into 10 groups based upon similarities of mal-alignment patterns. One model was randomly selected from each group and bites were produced on unembalmed human cadavers. Metric/angular measurements and hollow volume overlays of the models were compared with the bites made. The percentage of dentitions from each group as well as the 100 dental model population that could not be excluded as the biter was determined. Results showed difficulty distinguishing the biter from individuals with similarly aligned dentitions and in some cases, an incorrect biter appeared better correlated to the bite.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01076.x | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!