Long-term skeletal changes with rapid maxillary expansion: a systematic review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective was to evaluate long-term transverse, anteroposterior and vertical skeletal changes after rapid maxillary expansion (RME). The data were clinical trials that assessed skeletal changes through cephalometric analysis. No surgical or other simultaneous treatment during the evaluation period was accepted. Electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ASP Journal Club, DARE, CCTR, 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. A methodological checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the selected articles. Their references were also hand-searched for possible missing articles. Articles without an adequate control group to factor out growth changes were excluded. Only three articles (one measuring transverse and two anteroposterior and vertical changes) measured RME stability after active expansion, all of them had some methodological flaws, which limit the attainable conclusions. An individual analysis of these articles was made. Long-term transverse skeletal maxillary increase is approximately 25% of the total dental expansion for prepubertal adolescents. Better long-term outcomes are expected in transverse changes because of RME in less skeletally mature patients. RME appears not to produce clinically significant anteroposterior or vertical changes in the position of the maxilla and mandible. The conclusions from this systematic review should be considered with caution because only a secondary level of evidence was found. Long-term randomized clinical trials are needed.
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 | 0.006 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".