Permanent tooth agenesis in individuals with non‐syndromic Robin sequence: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate prevalence rates and patterns of permanent tooth agenesis in individuals with non-syndromic Robin sequence (ns-RS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two investigators independently carried out a literature search, using PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library, identifying articles relating to permanent tooth agenesis, diagnosed using panoramic radiographs, in individuals with ns-RS. The outcomes desired were prevalence rates and patterns of permanent tooth agenesis. The final search was carried out in January 2017. RESULTS: Six articles were selected for inclusion, with a total of 448 individuals with ns-RS. Data available in each study varied which allowed conducting further specific meta-analyses only on sample sizes of 339 or 378 individuals from three or four of the six included articles. The overall estimated prevalence rate of permanent tooth agenesis was 42% (95% CI: 35%-48%), excluding third molars, with no sex predilection. In individuals with tooth agenesis, approximately 30% had one missing tooth while 40% had two missing teeth. Tooth agenesis was more commonly bilateral (Relative Risk 2) and found in the mandible (Relative Risk 1.6). The highest prevalence of permanent tooth agenesis was found for mandibular second premolars (26%) followed by maxillary second premolars (14%). The most common tooth agenesis patterns were the agenesis of both mandibular second premolars, followed by the agenesis of all second premolars. CONCLUSION: Individuals with ns-RS have high prevalence rates of permanent tooth agenesis. The most prevalent tooth agenesis patterns are bilateral symmetric tooth agenesis, most commonly agenesis of both mandibular second premolars.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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".