Retrospective epidemiological study of mandibular rotational types in patients with orthodontical malocclusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY: The primary aim of this study was to illustrate the prevalence of facial skeletal discrepancy in an Italian sample. Another aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of the sagittal skeletal discrepancy classification in order to establish a morphologic pattern of growth useful for diagnosis and prediction of therapeutic results. The authors considered a sample of 732 patients (426 females and 306 males) aged between 6 and 17 years old. Cephalometric parameters were evaluated in order to establish a relationship between sagittal skeletal discrepancy and the classification of facial rotations (Lavergne and Petrovic). Facial types with neutral mandibular growth direction were the most prevalent, and were most observed in classes I and II; the latter was more represented than others in our sample. Facial types with posterior mandibular growth direction were the most prevalent in class III. Sagittal skeletal discrepancy classification is not able to establish a specific facial type or predict an individual responsiveness to treatment.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".