Clinical Effectiveness of Vestibular Shields in Orthodontic Treatment: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic literature search was performed to determine the clinical effectiveness of vestibular shields (VSs) in children undergoing orthodontic treatment. A comprehensive electronic search was performed in May 2022 using three databases (Medline via PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Ovid). The initial screening of articles was based on titles and abstracts. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were retrieved for the final quality assessment and the methodological qualities were assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane risk of bias. The initial search identified 262 publications, of which 15 studies were potentially eligible, with excellent intra-examiner reliability (K = 0.88). A total of five studies were selected for the final analysis, including one randomized controlled trial, three clinical trials, and one cohort study. VS may have potential impacts on orthodontic treatment, lips and dental arches, but further high-quality studies are warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".