What is a novel evidence-based periodontal prognosis model and how is it developed?

A novel reconstructed human epidermis model is basically a sophisticated imitation of human skin at the epidermal level. It gets developed by carefully selecting the right cells, providing the appropriate environment for their growth, and using modern technologies to assemble them into a functional and similar structure as the real epidermis.

Well, a novel mouse model of in-stent restenosis is created by using advanced scientific methods. This might involve precise surgical procedures, controlled conditions, and monitoring of various parameters to accurately represent the phenomenon. The development process is complex and requires expertise in the field.

A novel mouse model for frostbite injury is a specially designed experimental setup using mice to study the effects and mechanisms of frostbite. It's developed through controlled exposure to cold conditions and monitoring the physiological responses.

A micromechanical model of rate and state fiction is a tool in science. It's developed by observing and measuring small-scale mechanical behaviors and using that data to create a theoretical framework. This framework helps predict and understand various mechanical processes.

Story based evidence is commonly known as narrative evidence. This type of evidence relies on the telling of a story or series of events to support a claim or argument. However, it might not always be as reliable as empirical or scientific evidence.

Well, evidence based on story often has the power to engage emotions. People are more likely to remember a story than just cold facts. In research, anecdotal evidence (which is a type of evidence based on story) can sometimes lead to new hypotheses. For instance, if a patient tells a doctor a story about how a certain natural remedy seemed to work for them, it might inspire the doctor to look into it further, even if it's not yet scientifically proven.

One limitation is that stories can be subjective. The person telling the story may have biases or a particular agenda, which can distort the evidence. For example, in a courtroom, a witness might tell a story that is influenced by their personal feelings towards the defendant. Another limitation is that stories are often anecdotal. Just because something happened in one instance doesn't mean it's a generalizable truth. A story about one person's success with a particular diet doesn't prove that the diet will work for everyone. Also, stories can lack scientific rigor. There may be no control group, no measurement of variables, etc.

Some people point to the narrative structure. It has a continuous story with characters, plots, and settings similar to a novel. For example, it tells of different groups migrating and their interactions. Also, the lack of archaeological evidence for some of the events described in the Book of Mormon makes some suspect it might be more of a fictional creation like a novel.

One way to evaluate it is to look for consistency. If a story has a lot of contradictions within it, it might not be reliable evidence. For example, if someone tells a story about an event but changes key details each time they tell it.