The Americleft Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this investigation was to determine reliability and validity of GOSLON Yardstick ratings using plaster casts versus photo galleries of digital images in actual intercenter comparisons. The dental arch relationships of 112 patients with complete unilateral cleft lip and palate from 3 North American cleft/craniofacial centers were rated in 2 separate studies. In the first, plaster casts were used. For a later intercenter comparison, the same dental casts were scanned, digital bases added, and two-dimensional photographic galleries (6 views) were created for each set of casts. Three raters experienced with the GOSLON Yardstick carried out 2 separate ratings of the plaster casts in the first study, then of the photographic gallery of scanned digital images of the same casts in the second study. Inter- and intrarater reliabilities were calculated using the Weighted Kappa statistic. Average scores for each patient were calculated and compared between methods with correlation statistics and a Bland-Altman plot. Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare results between centers using both media. Reliability using both methods was very good and comparable between methods. Mean weighted Kappas were: inter-rater = 0.815 (plaster) versus 0.891 (photo); and intrarater = 0.866 (plaster) versus 0.891 (photo). There was a highly significant correlation (r = 0.920). Mean difference between centers was 0.033 of a GOSLON category. The level of significance of the differences found between centers with both methods was identical, confirming the interchangeability of both media presentations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".