MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113315911 · doi:10.2319/050711-322.1

The relationship between vertical facial morphology and overjet in untreated Class II subjects

2011· article· en· W2113315911 on OpenAlexaff
Humam Saltaji, Carlos Flores‐Mir, Paul W. Major, Mohamed Youssef

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Angle Orthodontist · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersInternational Association for Dental Research
KeywordsOverjetMaxillaAnalysis of varianceMedicineOrthodonticsDentistryBonferroni correctionMandible (arthropod mouthpart)MalocclusionMathematicsBiologyInternal medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between vertical facial morphology and overjet in untreated Class II subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The lateral cephalograms of 140 untreated Class II subjects (68 males and 72 females) between 8 and 11 years of age were divided into three groups based on their overjet value as measured on study casts: Group I normal overjet (less than 3 mm), Group II increased overjet (more than 3 mm but less than or equal to 6 mm), and Group III extreme overjet (more than 6 mm). Mean values and standard deviations of 28 variables measured on lateral cephalograms were calculated. Differences between the three groups were tested using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), followed by Bonferroni tests. Additionally, cephalometric differences between groups and available normal values for the Syrian population were evaluated using an independent t-test. RESULTS: Subjects with normal overjet showed a horizontal facial pattern and posterior inclination of the maxilla, whereas increased overjet subjects exhibited a neutral facial pattern. In contrast, subjects with extreme overjet had a vertical facial pattern and anterior inclination of the maxilla. The mandible was retrognathic and the maxilla was normally positioned in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: A positive association was found between the overjet and the tendency toward a hyperdivergent pattern.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations25
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Angle OrthodontistSame topicOrthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsFrench-language works237,207