Radiographic Assessment of Pediatric Condylar Fractures after Conservative Treatment with Functional Appliances—A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of conservative treatment with functional appliances for condylar fractures in pediatric age. METHODS: Four electronic databases (PubMed, EBSCO, Scopus, and Web of Science) were consulted with no restriction of publication status or year, up to 31 August 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: based on the PICOS criteria, the selection criteria were set for observational human studies, with at least 10 patients and six months of follow-up. The study population included pediatric patients (aged 5-16 years), with unilateral or bilateral condylar fracture, treated with functional appliances. Condylar remodeling and mandibular growth were analyzed through sequential radiographic examinations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent reviewers carried out title-abstract screening, and a senior investigator was involved to solve any disagreement. The quality of the evidence was assessed through the Canada Institute of Health Economics (IHE) quality appraisal checklist, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) quality assessment tool. RESULTS: A total of 971 articles were retrieved from the electronic search; among them, three studies met the eligibility criteria. A moderate risk of bias was detected in all the studies, due to common limitations (absence of multicenter studies, prospective design, blindness of the investigators, patients' drop-out). At follow-up examinations (between 6 months and 4.9 years), the difference of condylar neck length between the "injured" and "healthy" side was approximately 2 mm, while the anteroposterior condylar width discrepancy was recorded up to 1 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Short- and long-term data revealed that conservative treatment with functional appliances led to partial or full radiological recovery of the joint morphology, along with good to excellent functional results. Patients' age has a crucial role on the treatment choice, and the type of fracture (presence of condylar displacement, or dislocation) is also a major prognostic indicator of the radiologic outcome. LIMITATION: To confirm the effectiveness of functional appliances, more prospective clinical long-term follow-up studies with homogeneous samples of condylar fractures are deemed necessary. Registration: The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020205650).
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 | 0.010 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".