MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385425134 · doi:10.18502/jovr.v18i3.13778

Does Head Tilt Influence Facial Appearance More Than Head Turn?

2023· article· en· W4385425134 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ophthalmic and Vision Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanthusMedicineNostrilCheekTilt (camera)Facial symmetryColumellaHead tiltAnatomyOrthodonticsNoseEyelidSurgeryOphthalmologyGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To evaluate the frequency of facial asymmetry parameters in patients with head tilt versus those with head turn. Methods: This cross-sectional comparative study was performed on 155 cases, including 58 patients with congenital pure head turn due to Duane retraction syndrome (DRS), 33 patients with congenital pure head tilt due to upshoot in adduction or DRS, and 64 orthotropic subjects as the control group. The facial appearance was evaluated by computerized analysis of digital photographs of patients’ faces. Relative facial size (the ratio of the distance between the external canthus and the corner of the lips of both face sides) and facial angle (the angular difference between a line that connects two external canthi and another line that connects the two corners of the lips) measured as quantitative facial parameters. Qualitative parameters were evaluated by the presence of one-sided face, cheek, and nostril compression; and columella deviation. Results: The facial asymmetry frequency in patients with head tilt, head turn, and orthotropic subjects was observed in 32 (97%), 50 (86.2%), and 22 (34.3%), respectively (P < 0.001). In patients with head tilt and head turn, the mean facial angle was 1.78º ± 1.01º and 1.19º ± 0.84º, respectively (P = 0.004) and the mean relative facial size was 1.027 ± 0.018 and 1.018 ± 0.014, respectively (P = 0.018). The frequencies of one-sided nostril compression, cheek compression, face compression, and columella deviation in patients with pure head tilt were found in 19 (58%), 21 (64%), 19 (58%), and 19 (58%) patients, respectively, and in patients with pure head turn the frequencies were observed in 42 (72%), 37 (63%), 27 (47%), and 43 (74%), respectively. All quantitative and qualitative facial asymmetry parameters and facial asymmetry frequencies were significantly higher in head tilt and head turn patients as compared to the control group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: All facial asymmetry parameters in patients with head tilt and head turn were significantly higher than orthotropic subjects. The quantitative parameters such as relative facial size and facial angle were significantly higher in patients with pure head tilt than pure head turn. The results revealed that pure head tilt was associated with a higher prevalence of facial asymmetry than pure head turn.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.424 · 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