MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2539221204 · doi:10.1080/08869634.2016.1235254

Relationship between craniocervical orientation and center of force of occlusion in adults

2016· article· en· W2539221204 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

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

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCRANIO® · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientation (vector space)OcclusionCenter (category theory)MedicinePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGeometryMathematicsSurgeryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Clinical observation and anecdotal reports suggest changes can occur to dental occlusion following intervention with the National Upper Cervical Chiropractic Association (NUCCA) procedure. This case controlled study discerned if occlusion changes are measurable using a dental force plate (T-Scan®) following an adjustment to the craniocervical junction (CCJ). METHODS: A degree of case control was established by active patients being assessed twice prior to and following intervention. Before-after intervention assessment included posture evaluation and dental occlusion (T-Scan®). RESULTS: Findings suggest that changes in posture and occlusion can be observed after the NUCCA chiropractic procedure. Not all patients demonstrated a more balanced contact pattern following the adjustment, indicating a need for further investigation. DISCUSSION: These findings may suggest interconnectivity between the CCJ and an individual's occlusal contacts and support the need for further integration between chiropractors and dentists seeking to co-manage temporomandibular joint disorders.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.337 · 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