Evaluation of periodontal disease and oral inflammatory load in adults with special needs using oral neutrophil quantification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to validate and assess the feasibility of using an assay of oral neutrophils to measure periodontal inflammation in uncooperative adults with special needs. Conventional periodontal measurements and neutrophil counts obtained from oral swabs were performed on patients having dental care under general anesthesia (GA) and at subsequent recall. Forty-nine patients were assessed under GA and 30 (61%) returned for follow-up. A high prevalence of gingival inflammation was found at baseline and oral neutrophil levels positively correlated with traditional periodontal parameters (p < 0.05). Neutrophils were acquired using swabs for 100% of patients examined at recall and a significant reduction in oral inflammatory load was noted after a single treatment session (p < 0.05), despite the persistence of poor oral hygiene and prolonged recall intervals. This study demonstrates that oral neutrophil quantification may serve as a novel and standardized method for clinical assessment of periodontal diseases in people with special needs.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".