The effect of the tongue in groove technique on the nasolabial angle and nasal tip projection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The tongue in groove technique (TIG) is a useful technique for the correction of the nasal tip projection and the nasolabial angle. The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of this technique for nasal tip rotation and projection correction in the Iranian society. Methods This is a retrospective clinical trial study of 20 patients undergoing open septo-rhinoplasty using TIG technique from January 2017 to August 2019 at the oral and maxillofacial unit of Bu Ali Hospital and private sector. Preoperative and postoperative profile view photographs were compared to assess the changes in tip projection and rotation. Results Fifteen patients (75%) had normal angular size, and 5 of them (25%) were not within the normal range after the surgery. The Fisher exact test showed that this success was statistically significant (P = 0.006). Ten patients (50%) had normal projection size, postoperatively. The Fisher exact test showed that this effect was statistically significant (P < 0.01) Conclusion The study demonstrated the benefit of TIG on the correction of nasal tip projection and rotation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".