MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418847449

Treatment of anterior crossbite in the primary dentition with esthetic crowns: report of 3 cases.

2011· article· en· W2418847449 on OpenAlexaff
German O Ramirez-Yañez

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCrossbiteDentitionMalocclusionDentistryOrthodonticsSagittal planeOcclusionPermanent dentitionAnterior teethSurgeryAnatomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anterior crossbite is a sagittal malocclusion occurring in approximately 4 to 5% of children with primary dentition. Although self-correction may occur, treating an anterior crossbite as early as possible has been proposed to prevent problems in the transitional and permanent dentitions. The purpose of this paper is to present an optional restorative treatment used in 3 cases where an anterior crossbite was treated by restoring the primary maxillary incisors with esthetic pediatric strip crowns. In all 3 cases, the crossbite was successfully treated by using the proposed technique over 1 to 2 weeks. A 6-month follow-up showed that the occlusion stabilized into a sagittal normal relationship, permitting normal dentofacial growth and development to continue. The technique presented here can be added to the armamentarium of pediatric dentists and general practitioners to correct anterior crossbites diagnosed in the primary dentition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOrthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsFrench-language works237,207