MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Relation Between Anthropometric and Cephalometric Measurements and Proportions of the Face of Healthy Young White Adult Men and Women

2003· article· en· W2007562135 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Craniofacial Surgery · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthropometryMedicineCephalometryOrthodonticsDentistryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The specific aim of this study was to determine the differences between 6 anthropometric (taken from the surface) and cephalometric (taken from x-rays) measurements and 12 proportion indices formed by the measurements obtained from the face of 51 healthy Caucasoid young adult males and females. The z-score analysis revealed negligible differences in frequency of normal values, in surface measurements 97.4% (298 of 306) versus 96.7% (296 of 306) in cephalometric ones. The optimal normal measurements dominated, in males in 76.8% and in females in 80.8%. The mean values of the 6 linear measurements, taken from the surface and the cephalogram of the face were in equal number similar and significantly dissimilar in both sexes (Table 1). Comparison of the mean anthropometric and cephalometric proportion indices did not show significant differences in the two sexes (Table 2). For males 50% of the 12 proportions the indices were similar and 50% were significantly different. For females the frequency of similar proportions was seen in 33.3% and in 66.7% moderately-severely differing, statistically not significant. The z-score analysis identified subnormal measurements on the facial surface in 2.6% (8 of 306) and in cephalometric ones in 3.3% (10 of 306). The subnormal measurements of mild and moderate degree disclosed on the skeleton were not detected on the surface and some of the severely subnormal ones became mild-moderate on the skin surface. The study showed that the vertical anthropometric and cephalometric measurements in the facial profile were in highly significant percentage normal when compared with their normative data established for healthy populations. Generally, the cephalometric normal measurements were smaller than those of the anthropometric ones, some of them significantly. The significant differences between the proportions on the surface and skeleton in healthy subjects advice to be cautious in clinical practice, to judge the morphological changes of the face separately on the surface and on the skeleton of the patient.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.248 · 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