Safe zones of the maxillary alveolar bone in Down syndrome for orthodontic miniscrew placement assessed with cone-beam computed tomography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to quantify the available maxillary alveolar bone in a group of individuals with Down syndrome (DS) to determine the best areas for orthodontic miniscrew placement. The study group consisted of 40 patients with DS aged 12-30 years. We also selected an age and sex-matched control group. All measurements were performed on cross-sectional images obtained with cone-beam computed tomography. The selected areas of interest were the 4 interradicular spaces between the distal wall of the canine and the mesial wall of the second molar, in both maxillary quadrants. We measured the vestibular-palatine (VP) and mesiodistal (MD) dimensions to depths of 3, 6 and 9 mm from the alveolar ridge. We also measured the bone density in the same interradicular spaces of interest to 6 mm of depth from the alveolar crest. VP measurements were longer in the more posterior sectors and as the distance from the alveolar ridge increased. MD measurements also increased progressively as the distance from the alveolar ridge increased. In general, both the VP and MD measurements in the DS group were similar among the male and female participants. As age increased, the MD distance increased, while the VP distance decreased. The VP distance was ≥6 mm in at least 75% of the DS group in practically all assessed interdental spaces. The MD distance was ≥2 mm in at least 75% of the DS group only between the first and second molar, to 9 mm of depth from the alveolar ridge. The safe area for inserting orthodontic miniscrews in DS patients is restricted to the most posterior and deepest area of the maxillary alveolar bone.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".