MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366602552

Virtually Guided Palate Lateral Wall, TAD-Supported Expansion in Craniofacial Skeletally Mature Adolescents and Young Adults.

2023· article· en· W4366602552 on OpenAlexaff
Miguel Hirschhaut, Nelson León, Asdrubal Pereira, Carlos Flores‐Mir

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCleft Lip and Palate Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCraniofacialDentistryHard palateOrthodonticsTransverse planeOrthopedic surgerySurgeryAnatomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Different temporary anchorage device (TAD)-assisted rapid palatal expanders may be used to treat malocclusions involving the transverse dimension and, in many instances, prevent more complex situations in the future. Each style of expander has advantages and disadvantages. The acrylic type of TAD-supported palate lateral wall expander is a reliable and cost-effective appliance for expansion treatment in adolescents and young adults (ie, aged 13 to 21). In comparison, other palatal expander designs are more suitable for older patients. One advantage of an acrylic TAD-supported palate lateral wall expander system is that it can be used for both orthopedic expansions (ie, nonsurgical TAD-supported only) and surgically assisted rapid palatal expansions (ie, with the aid of minimally invasive corticotomies) in patients who do not respond to nonsurgical expansion. This article presents general diagnostic considerations regarding maxillary transverse deficiencies, discusses the importance of palatal expansion in managing malocclusions, and describes protocols for nonsurgical and surgical management of transverse deficiencies with an acrylic TAD-supported virtually guided palate lateral wall expander.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCleft Lip and Palate ResearchFrench-language works237,207