Photobiomodulation and Orthodontic Treatment with Clear Aligners: A Case Report of Severe Crowding and Agenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to demonstrate the effectiveness of photobiomodulation in accelerating orthodontic treatment with clear aligners in correcting an orthodontic malocclusion characterized by severe crowding and agenesis in an adult subject. An adult male patient with Class I malocclusion, a mild Class III skeletal base and severe crowding was treated with 88 Invisalign® (Align Technology, Santa Clara, CA, USA) pairs of aligners replaced every 5 days in combination with an Orthopulse™ (Biolux Research, Vancouver, BC, Canada) photobiomodulation device for home use by the patient. The total orthodontic treatment time was 440 days. Orthopulse™ is a photobiomodulation device that generates continuous beams of near-infrared light (NIR—near-infrared) with a wavelength of 850 nm and a power of 42 mW/cm2 to produce an average energy density on the surface of the silicone impression of 9.3 J/cm2. The combined use of clear aligners and the Orthopulse™ device allowed the patient to replace the aligners according to an experimental 5-day protocol to speed up the orthodontic therapy and, thus, resolve the malocclusion in less time than the manufacturer’s standard.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".