Relation of maxillary permanent central incisor rotations with the primary palatal margin and overjet in repaired complete unilateral cleft lip and palate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To examine the relation of maxillary permanent central incisor rotation with the primary palatal margin (PPM) and overjet in the mixed dentition in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (cUCLP). Materials and Methods: Dental casts and preorthodontic records taken before alveolar bone grafting were examined to exclude patients having permanent teeth distal to the cleft side maxillary central incisor (CS1) and mesial to the cleft. Maxillary central incisor rotation, the angle between PPM and midline, proximity of the lingual surface of the central incisor to PPM, and overjet were measured from standardized occlusal photographs of the dental casts of 54 children with repaired cUCLP (38 M, 16 F; aged 8.7 ± 1.0 years). Descriptive analysis and correlation statistics were performed. Results: Rotations were noted in 92.6% of the CS1. Their magnitude (111.2 ± 24.2°) was significantly greater than the noncleft side maxillary central incisor (NCS1) rotations (76.7 ± 15.7°). Rotations were predominantly distolabial for the CS1 and distopalatal for the NCS1. The PPM was located within 2 mm of the lingual surface of the CS1 in 35.2% of the sample. Severe CS1 rotation existed in 48.2% of the sample and was significantly correlated with the PPM angle (r = 0.3; P = .046) and when its proximity to the PPM was within 2 mm (φ = 0.3; P = .028). Overjet was not significantly correlated with the magnitude of rotation. Conclusions: The angle between PPM and the midline and its proximity to CS1 are associated with the severity of CS1 rotation in repaired cUCLP. Orthodontic implications are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".