Periodontal disease and spontaneous preterm birth: a case control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several studies have suggested an association between periodontal disease and prematurity but this finding has not been consistently observed. METHODS: Case control study. Cases (n = 50) were women who had delivered after spontaneous preterm labor at <35 weeks gestation. Two groups of controls (n = 101) were recruited: women who were undelivered but at a preterm gestation and women who delivered at term. A standard, clinical, periodontal examination was performed and gingival crevicular fluid was obtained from standardized locations and tested for neutrophil elastase along with the bacterial enzymes gingipain and dipeptidylpeptidase. Data were analyzed with Fisher's exact tests, ANOVA and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: There was no difference in the proportion of sites with significant attachment loss (> or =3 mm): Cases-3.2%, Controls-2.2% p = 0.21. The gingival crevicular fluid concentrations of elastase and gingipain were elevated in cases vs. controls 238.8 uU/ul vs. 159.6 uU/ul p = .007 and 2.70 uU/ul vs. 1.56 uU/ul p = .001. On multivariate analysis, the mean log concentration of elastase, but not of gingipain, remained a significant predictor of preterm labor p = .0.015. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence that clinical periodontal disease is associated with spontaneous preterm birth. Elevated gingival crevicular fluid levels of elastase were associated with preterm birth but further research is needed before this can be assumed to be a causal relationship.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".