Tratamento da classe II hiperdivergente com o aparelho extra bucal de Thurow modificado
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: natural dentofacial changes and that induced by the Thurow modified extra oral appliance (TMEOA) were evaluated in this prospective study. Methodology: the data consisted of fifteen Class II division 1 children 7 to 10 years old, with anterior open bite and hiperdivergent facial pattern treated with the Thurow appliance and of fifteen Class II division 1 children followed longitudinally from 6 to 12 years of age without treatment (Burlington Growth Centre, Toronto University, Canada). The analyses were based in traditional measurements obtained in lateral cephalometric radiographs scanned with the aid of the software Radiocef Studio®. Radiographs were taken in the beginning and after 1 year of treatment for the treated group and at the 6, 9 and 12 years of age for the control group. Results: the data analysis showed that the TMEOA significantly reduced the SNA, ANB, AOBO, SNPOc SNPM, SGO/NMe, OJ e OB. On the other hand the appliance did not interfere with the SNB e SNPP. The natural growth promoted significant change in the ANB, AOBO, SNPOc, OJ e OB from 6 to 9 years and in the SNB, SNPOc e SGo/NMe from 9 to 12 years. The restriction of the maxillary growth (SNA), reduction of the skeletal discrepancy (ANB) and the reduction of the overjet (OJ) were significant with the treatment considering the natural growth as verified in the control group. Conclusion: the TMEOA corrected the skeletal Class II malocclusion by maxillary restriction, reducing the overjet, closing the anterior open bite and decreasing both the hyper divergent facial pattern and mandible plane inclination.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".