{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01717171717171717, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00202020202020202, 'mean_word_length': 5.435064935064935, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Early treatment of Class II, division 1 malocclusion--comparison of alternative treatment modalities.

The purpose of this paper was to compare the findings from three randomized clinical trials that investigated alternative treatments of Class II, division 1 malocclusion in young children. The trials were conducted at the University of North Carolina, the University of Florida, and the University of Pennsylvania. The appliances investigated in each center were a functional appliance versus a headgear. Variations in the specific aims and the working hypotheses were noted. The types of appliances, length of treatment, and methods of evaluation were also different. A general comparison of selected clinically relevant findings reveals similarities and differences in conclusions, but underlines the importance of assessing each study on the basis of its original hypothesis. The separate and combined contribution of these studies to the state of knowledge and research is discussed.