A Study of Speech, Language, Hearing, and Dentition in Children with Cleft Lip Only
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence of speech, language, hearing, and dental problems in children with an initial diagnosis of isolated cleft lip only (CL), for which evidence-based practice can be developed. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of 95 patients with cleft lip (age range, 2.8 to 3.7 years; mean, 3.1 years). RESULTS: Speech and language impairment was documented in 13% and 18% of the patients, respectively. Thirty-three percent of the children presented with middle ear effusion. Thirteen percent had abnormal hearing. With one exception, the type and degree of hearing loss was a mild conductive loss most often attributed to the presence of effusion. Dental and/or occlusal anomalies were documented in 62% of the patients. A supernumerary tooth was the most frequently occurring dental anomaly and crossbite the most frequently occurring occlusal anomaly. Two children had a submucous cleft palate. Resonance was abnormal in 5% of the children. CONCLUSION: Children with an initial diagnosis of CL need to be monitored by the interdisciplinary team for speech, language, ear disease, hearing, and dentition beginning in infancy and followed until all management needs are met.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".