Soft tissue changes with fixed functional appliances in Class II division 1.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate facial soft tissue changes after the use of fixed functional appliances in Class II division 1 malocclusion cases using a systematic review of the literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Several electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Cochrane Database, Embase, Web of Sciences, and Lilacs) were searched with the help of a senior Health Sciences librarian. Abstracts that appeared to fulfill the initial selection criteria were selected by consensus. The original articles were then retrieved. Their references were also hand-searched for possible missing articles. Clinical trials assessing facial soft tissue changes with the use of fixed functional appliances without any surgical intervention or syndromic characteristics were considered. A comparable untreated control group was required to factor out normal growth changes. Four articles using Herbst and one using Jasper Jumper fulfilled the selection criteria. An individual analysis of these articles was made and some methodological flaws were identified. RESULTS: Although fixed functional appliances produce some significant statistical changes in the soft tissue profile, the magnitude of the changes may not be perceived as clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The conclusions from this systematic review should be considered with caution because only a secondary level of evidence was found. Long-term double-blinded prospective randomized clinical trials are needed. Three-dimensional quantification of the soft tissue changes is required to overcome current limitations in our understanding of the soft tissue changes obtained with the use of fixed functional appliances.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".