MétaCan
← all works

Reliability of the SWAG—The Standardized Way to Assess Grafts Method for Alveolar Bone Grafting in Patients with Cleft Lip and Palate

2016· article· en· 17 citations· W2479637877 on OpenAlex· 10.1597/14-214

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

The three-model screen

all 1,000 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: aff_core · design weight: 5595.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: medium

Intra- and inter-rater reliability of a radiographic scale for grading bone grafts; clinical instrument reliability in the measurement sense, a polysemy trap rather than metaresearch.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

This study tests the reliability of a clinical graft-assessment instrument rather than research practice.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Interrater reliability of a clinical graft-assessment scale; clinical measurement validation, polysemy trap not research reproducibility.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to test a new method, a Standardized Way to Assess Grafts (SWAG), to rate alveolar bone graft (ABG) outcomes for patients with cleft lip and palate. DESIGN: This was a retrospective comparison using the SWAG scale. SETTING: This study took place in four cleft palate centers with different treatment protocols. METHODS: A total of 160 maxillary occlusal radiographs taken 3 to 18 months post-ABG for sequentially treated patients with cleft lip and palate were assessed using the SWAG scale. Radiographs were scanned, standardized, blinded, and rated by 6 calibrated orthodontists to assess vertical thirds, bony root coverage, and complete bony fill. All radiographs were rated twice, 24 hours apart, by the same raters. MAIN OUTCOMES: Intra- and interrater reliabilities were assessed. RESULTS: Intrarater reliability was good to very good (.760; .652-.834), and interrater reliability was moderate to good (.606; .569-.681), comparable to previously published methods. CONCLUSIONS: Rater reliabilities were shown to be comparable to or better than existing methods. The SWAG method was validated for ABG assessments in the mixed and permanent dentitions based on reliabilities in an intercenter outcome comparison.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

The record

Venue
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Topic
Cleft Lip and Palate Research
Field
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Canadian institutions
SickKids FoundationDalhousie University
Funders
Keywords
MedicineGraftingDentistryBone graftingReliability (semiconductor)OrthodonticsDental alveolusSurgery
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes