MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974229328 · doi:10.1159/000260845

Effect of Sucrose as a Gustatory Stimulus on the Flow Rates of Parotid and Whole Saliva

2009· article· en· W1974229328 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCaries Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSalivary Gland Disorders and Functions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsSalivaSucroseSugarChemistryIngestionEndocrinologyInternal medicineAnimal scienceFood scienceMedicineBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study, on 12 young adults, was designed to determine the relationship between the sucrose concentration (0–80%) in the mouth and the flow rates of both whole and parotid saliva. In addition, the peak flow rate of parotid saliva was determined and the time interval between sucrose ingestion and achievement of maximum flow rate (DELAY), since these parameters were identified as determinants of oral clearance of sugar in a recent theoretical study of that process (Caries Res. 17:321–334, 1983). The mean ( ± SD) value of DELAY was 6.5 ± 2.1 s, which was independent of sucrose concentration. The peak flow rate was maintained only for a few seconds and then declined to a level linearly related to the sucrose concentration. However, even with 80% sucrose, mean flow rates for parotid and whole saliva, over the initial 30 s of stimulation, were only 0.39 ± 0.10 ml/min/gland and 3.8 ± 0.51 ml/min, respectively, with peak parotid flow rates being about double the mean values. To promote oral sugar clearance, it is desirable that dietary sources of sucrose be consumed only in association with foodstuffs having strong stimulatory effects on salivary flow.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.355 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it