Is Asthma a Risk Factor for Dental Caries? Findings from a Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been suggested that asthmatic children may have a higher caries risk, both as a result of their medical condition and the physical and physiological effects of their pharmacotherapy. By examining the association over time between asthma and caries increment, this study tested the hypothesis that childhood asthma is associated with an increased caries increment. In a long-standing New Zealand cohort study, participants' long-term asthma histories and the 3-year net caries increment between the ages of 15 and 18 years were examined. Of the 781 who were examined at 15 and 18 years, 39 participants were consistently taking anti-asthma medication at the ages of 9, 11, 13 and 15 years (and were labelled in this study as 'medication-determined asthmatics'), 56 were identified as consistent wheezers at the ages of 9, 11, 13 and 15 years ('wheeze-determined asthmatics') and 36 were members of both groups. A smaller group (n = 9) was identified as being very-long-term asthmatics (asthma at 5 years of age and at the ages of 9, 11, 13 and 15 years). Some 206 study members were identified as having no history of asthma, asthma medication or significant wheeze at any time up to and including 18 years. The overall mean net caries increment between the ages of 15 and 18 years was 2.06 surfaces (SD, 3.76). There were no significant differences in caries increment between the 206 asthma-free participants and any of the asthma groups. This study provides little evidence for an asthma-caries causative 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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".