Standardization of Cranial Index Measurement in Sagittal Craniosynostosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
: Cranial index is a widely used 2-dimensional measure of skull form. It has traditionally been calculated as a ratio of the maximal cranial width divided by the maximal skull length. Nevertheless, the points of maximal skull length change dramatically in sagittal craniosynostosis due to variable degrees of frontal and occipital bossing. Therefore, such anatomical changes influence the calculated cranial index. METHOD: This is a retrospective comparative study of 2 methods of measuring cranial index; the traditional method that measures the skull length from glabella to opithcranion versus a modified method that measures the maximal skull length from the most anterior point of the frontal bossing to opithcranion. Cranial indices for 115 patients of radiologically and clinically diagnosed nonsyndromic sagittal craniosynostosis were calculated using both methods. Correlation and Agreements Limits were calculated for comparison between the 2 methods. RESULTS: Males constituted 74.8% (n = 86) of the total sample size with the remaining 29 participants identified as female. The mean age of the study participants was 4.8 months (range 8 days-12 months). The 2 methods were strongly correlated (r = 0.94). The Agreement Limits were calculated to be between 4.02% and 0.18%. CONCLUSION: Typical anatomical changes such as variable degrees of frontal and occipital bossing influence the accuracy of cranial index measurement in sagittal craniosynostosis. Traditional method of cephalic index measurement could underestimate the severity of scaphocephaly.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".