The Need for Orthognathic Surgery in Nonsyndromic Patients with Repaired Isolated Cleft Palate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of need for orthognathic surgery among nonsyndromic patients with isolated cleft palate repaired during infancy at The Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto, Canada. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENTS: PATIENTS with nonsyndromic isolated cleft palate born between 1970 and 1997 with available records including a lateral cephalometric radiograph taken at ≥15 years of age. METHODS: PATIENTS who had undergone or were being prepared for orthognathic surgery were automatically counted as requiring surgery. For the remaining patients, lateral cephalometric radiographs were traced and analyzed. Arbitrarily set cephalometric criteria were used to identify the "objective" need for orthognathic surgery. RESULTS: Of the 189 patients identified with nonsyndromic isolated cleft palate and for whom records were available, 25 (13.2%) were deemed to require orthognathic surgery. Of the surgical cohort, 92% required surgical correction for a Class III malocclusion. Similar percentages of males and females required orthognathic surgery. An apparently greater proportion of patients of Asian background (18.5%) than of white background (10.6%) required surgery, but this difference was not significant (P = .205). CONCLUSIONS: The current results suggest that approximately one in eight patients at our institution with nonsyndromic isolated cleft palate requires orthognathic surgery. There is a tendency for this to be higher in patients of Asian descent and lower in patients of white descent. Variability in extent, severity, and phenotype of the cleft, which may be attributed largely to genetics, may play an important role in dictating the need for orthognathic surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".