Bite Force and Occlusal Patterns in the Mixed Dentition of Children with Down Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Oral function in Down Syndrome (DS) patients has been of interest to clinicians and researchers. This study aimed to evaluate the parameters of occlusal force and pattern of children with Down syndrome (DS) during mixed dentition when compared to age and gender-matched controls. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty DS and 30 healthy children, aged 7 to 12 years, participated in the evaluation of the parameters of the occlusal pattern and occlusal force distribution analysis. Both groups underwent clinical examination, occlusal force and pattern measurements using a computerized occlusal analysis system (T-Scan 8 occlusal analysis, Tekscan, Inc., S. Boston, MA). Occlusion time, percentage of force distribution, force outliers, center of force target area, center of force trajectory and evaluation of closure arc were compared between the two groups using the Pearson's Chi Square test. RESULTS: Children with DS had more occlusal and vertical malocclusion compared to the control group (p < 0.001). The occlusion time for DS group (0.75 ± 0.7s) was significantly longer than the control group (0.015 ± 0.05s) (p < 0.001). The closure arc for DS group was mostly irregular (53%), while the control group showed ideal closure arc. In control group, the age had a significant influence on the occlusion time, while height, weight, and BMI had a significant influence on the mouth opening. None of these variables had such effect on children with DS. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study showed high prevalence of orofacial dysfunction among DS population. The occlusal analysis showed that children with DS had longer occlusion time and a lack of ideal occlusion pattern compared to age matched controls.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".