Retrospective CBCT analysis of airway volume changes after bone-borne vs tooth-borne rapid maxillary expansion
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objectives: To compare changes in upper airway volume after maxillary expansion with bone- and tooth-borne appliances in adolescents and to evaluate the dentoskeletal effects of each expansion modality. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 36 adolescents who had bilateral maxillary crossbite and received bone-borne maxillary expansion (average age: 14.7 years) or tooth-borne maxillary expansion (average age: 14.4 years). Subjects had two cone beam computed tomography images acquired, one before expansion (T 1 ) and a second after a 3-month retention period (T 2 ). Images were oriented, and three-dimensional airway volume and dentoskeletal expansion were measured. Analysis of variance was used to test for differences between the two expansion methods for pretreatment, posttreatment, and prepost changes. Paired t -tests were used to test for significance of prepost changes within each method. Results: Both groups showed significant increase only in nasal cavity and nasopharynx volume ( P < .05), but not oropharynx and maxillary sinus volumes. Intermolar and maxillary width increased significantly in both groups ( P < .05); however, the buccal inclination of maxillary molars increased significantly only in the tooth-borne group ( P < .05). There was no significant difference between tooth- and bone-borne expansion groups, except for the significantly larger increase in buccal inclination of the maxillary right first molar after tooth-borne expansion. Conclusions: In adolescents, both tooth- and bone-borne RME resulted in an increase in nasal cavity and nasopharynx volume, as well as expansion in maxillary intermolar and skeletal widths. However, only tooth-borne expanders caused significant buccal tipping of maxillary molars.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it