Three-dimensional evaluation of the maxillary arch and palate in unilateral cleft lip and palate subjects using digital dental casts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess arch width, palatal surface area, and volume in surgically treated unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP) in mixed dentition children in comparison with non-cleft lip and palate (NCLP) children using a 3D laser scanning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 38 subjects (Caucasian origin), 5.63-11.9 years of age (mean, 9.33 ± 1.67 years), were included. 19 in each group (UCLP and NCLP). Digital dental casts were obtained using a 3 Shape R700 laser scanner. Intercanine and intermolar widths (cusp and gingival levels), palatal surface area and volume were measured. An independent sample Student's t-test and an ANOVA were undertaken with significance level set as P < 0.05. RESULTS: Intercanine widths at the cusp (5.60 mm; P < 0.001) and at the gingival level (3.11 mm; P = 0.014), palatal area (141.5 mm2; P = 0.009) and volume (890.7 mm3; P = 0.029) were significantly lower in the UCLP compared to the control group. LIMITATIONS: A smaller part of the subjects was in late mixed dentition phase. To overcome this limitation a matched control group was used. In seven subjects with UCLP, some teeth were missing, which might have had an influence on the dental measurements. However, these subjects could not be excluded because eliminating more severely affected subjects, would have introduced bias. CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional evaluation of the maxillary arch and palate highlighted significant differences between UCLP and non-UCLP subjects in mixed dentition phase, suggesting that orthopaedic maxillary expansion is advisable in UCLP.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".