Viscoelastic response of the midpalatal suture during maxillary expansion treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The viscoelastic response of the midpalatal suture during maxillary expansion treatment has been sparsely studied. The aim of our study was to use viscoelastic models to investigate the effect of appliance mechanics on sutural tissue. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four creep-strain models were utilized in predicting the midpalatal suture's response to a constant-force application during expansion treatment. The functional forms included a three-term separable, three-term inseparable, two-term inseparable, and single-term arrangement. The functions were then transformed into subsequent stress-relaxation representations to predict suture response as a result of 0.25, 0.20, 0.15, and 0.10 mm displacements. Finally, the single-term creep-strain representation was altered to simulate treatment decaying force during treatment. A force that decays 30 and 10% of an initially applied 0.98 N was considered for decaying functions over a 6-week period, and compared to strain resulting from a constant-force application. RESULTS: This analysis illustrated that the decay in suture strain closely followed decay in force and that the path of decay had minimal impact on overall results. Also, it was found that a single screw activation would likely not cause suture soft tissue failure, even for a 0.25 mm displacement, and that suture stress rapidly decayed within minutes of activation. CONCLUSION: Results from this study support the notion of maintaining a low-magnitude constant traction on the suture during treatment to avoid soft tissue failure and promote tissue remodeling.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".