L’influence du syndrome d’apnées obstructives du sommeil sur la décision thérapeutique orthodontique chez l’enfant et l’adolescent. Partie 1 : Phénotypes du SAOS, temporalité des traitements et effets réciproques sur la croissance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Pediatric OSAS is a complex condition, comprising a plurality of clinical signs, complicated by the phenomena of growth. Its etiology is dominated by the hypertrophy of lymphoid organs, but obesity and certain craniofacial and neuromuscular tone abnormalities also contribute. Material and Method: The authors summarize the interrelations between pediatric OSAS endotypes, phenotypes and orthodontic anomalies. They report clinical practice recommendations on the multidisciplinary management of pediatric OSAS and define the place and timing of orthodontics. Results: There is an indication for treatment of pediatric OSAS for an OAHI greater than 5/h, regardless of comorbidity, as well as for symptomatic children, whose OAHI is between 1-5/h. The first line of treatment is adenotonsillectomy, but it does not always normalize the OAHI. Complementary treatments are often necessary: early orthodontics (rapid maxillary expansion, myofunctional appliances), oral reeducation, as well as the management of obesity and allergies. Careful watching, without treatment is possible for mild cases with few symptoms, as pediatric OSAS tends to resolve naturally with growth. Discussion: The therapeutic approach is stratified, depending on the severity of OSAS and the child's age. In terms of orthodontic repercussions, obesity is associated with earlier maturation and some facial morphological differences, while oral hypotonia and nasal obstruction can alter facial growth, promoting mandibular hyperdivergence and maxillary deficiency. Conclusion: Orthodontists are in a privileged position for the detection, follow-up and certain treatments of OSAS.
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 | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".