Side Effects of Cranial Remolding Orthoses: A Multi-Site Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Infants with deformational head shapes may be treated with a Cranial Remolding Orthosis (CRO). Risks of CROs include skin irritations and other minor side effects. It is important to examine the incidence of complications with CRO treatment to determine if the potential benefits outweigh the risks. This study retrospectively examined surveys provided by both practitioners and caregivers regarding orthotic treatment side effects and wear time at four clinics in Canada. Statistical analysis including the Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact tests were performed to examine how the side effects varied by treatment site and by reported orthotic wear time. In total, 5,025 surveys about the CRO treatment of 453 patients were reviewed. The most common side effects were pressure spots, redness lasting for more than 1 hour, excessive sweat, and foul odor; however, the vast majority reported no significant issues (87.08%). Only 2.81% of surveys reported multiple side effects, which was about three times more like to happen when the CRO was reported to have fit problems. Wear time is correlated with the report of side effects; infants who wore the CRO 18 to 23.5 hours had statistically fewer side effects than those who wore the CRO for less time. The reported incidence of side effects may be artificially inflated because infants experiencing side effects are more likely to have more frequent follow-up. Overall, the side effects of CRO treatment reported in this cohort were relatively rare and minimal, indicating CRO treatment is a safe way to treat deformational head shapes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".