MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Björk-Jarabak cephalometric analysis on CBCT synthesized cephalograms with different dentofacial sagittal skeletal patterns

2014· article· en· W2089663147 on OpenAlexaff
Yalil Augusto Rodríguez-Cárdenas, Luis Ernesto Arriola‐Guillén, Carlos Flores‐Mir

Bibliographic record

VenueDental Press Journal of Orthodontics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGonial angleSagittal planeCephalometric analysisCephalometryMedicineOrthodonticsAnalysis of varianceCone beam computed tomographyMandible (arthropod mouthpart)MalocclusionDentistryRadiographyComputed tomographyAnatomyBiologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the Björk and Jabarak cephalometric analysis generated from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) synthesized lateral cephalograms in adults with different sagittal skeletal patterns. METHODS: The sample consisted of 46 CBCT synthesized cephalograms obtained from patients between 16 and 40 years old. A Björk and Jarabak cephalometric analysis among different sagittal skeletal classes was performed. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), multiple range test of Tukey, Kruskal-Wallis test, and independent t-test were used as appropriate. RESULTS: In comparison to the standard values: Skeletal Class III had increased gonial and superior gonial angles (P < 0.001). This trend was also evident when sex was considered. For Class I males, the sella angle was decreased (P = 0.041), articular angle increased (P = 0.027) and gonial angle decreased (P = 0.002); whereas for Class III males, the gonial angle was increased (P = 0.012). For Class I females, the articular angle was increased (P = 0.029) and the gonial angle decreased (P = 0.004). Björk's sum and Björk and Jabarak polygon sum showed no significant differences. The facial biotype presented in the three sagittal classes was mainly hypodivergent and neutral. CONCLUSIONS: In this sample, skeletal Class III malocclusion was strongly differentiated from the other sagittal classes, specifically in the mandible, as calculated through Björk and Jarabak analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDental Press Journal of OrthodonticsSame topicOrthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsFrench-language works237,207