MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223504137 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-09764-y

Craniofacial morphology in Apert syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4223504137 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammad Khursheed Alam, Ahmed Ali Alfawzan, Kumar Chandan Srivastava, Deepti Shrivastava, Kiran Kumar Ganji

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCraniofacial Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCraniofacialMeta-analysisScopusMEDLINEWeb of scienceMedicineSystematic reviewPopulationInternal medicineBiologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This meta-analysis aims to compare Apert syndrome (AS) patients with non-AS populations (not clinically or genetically diagnosed) on craniofacial cephalometric characteristics (CCC) to combine publicly available scientific information while also improving the validity of primary study findings. A comprehensive search was performed in the following databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Medline, and Web of Science, an article published between 1st January 2000 to October 17th, 2021. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed to carry out this systematic review. We used the PECO system to classify people with AS based on whether or not they had distinctive CCC compared to the non-AS population. Following are some examples of how PECO has been used: People with AS are labeled P; clinical or genetic diagnosis of AS is labeled E; individuals without AS are labeled C; CCC of AS are labeled O. Using the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality-Assessment-Scale, independent reviewers assessed the articles' methodological quality and extracted data. 13 studies were included in the systematic review. 8 out of 13 studies were score 7–8 in NOS scale, which indicated that most of the studies were medium to high qualities. Six case–control studies were analyzed for meta-analysis. Due to the wide range of variability in CCC, we were only able to include data from at least three previous studies. There was a statistically significant difference in N-S-PP ( I 2 : 76.56%; P = 0.014; CI 1.27 to − 0.28) and Greater wing angle ( I 2 : 79.07%; P = 0.008; CI 3.07–1.17) between AS and control subjects. Cleft palate, anterior open bite, crowding in the upper jaw, and hypodontia occurred more frequently among AS patients. Significant shortening of the mandibular width, height and length is the most reported feature in AS patients. CT scans can help patients with AS decide whether to pursue orthodontic treatment alone or to have their mouth surgically expanded. The role of well-informed orthodontic and maxillofacial practitioners is critical in preventing and rehabilitating oral health issues.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicCraniofacial Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207