Is tooth loss associated with irritable bowel syndrome?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the relationship between number of teeth and gastric disturbances has been recognised, limited data are available linking tooth loss and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). This study aimed to investigate the relation between dental status and IBS among Iranian adults. In a cross-sectional study on 4669 Iranian adults, dental status was evaluated using a self-administered questionnaire. Participants were categorised into five main groups: those with full dentition (without denture), those with denture, individual who had lost 1-2 teeth, 3-5 teeth and half of one jaw or more. IBS and its subtypes were defined using Rome III criteria. After adjusting for different confounding variables, those who had lost 1-2 and 3-5 teeth had 1·35 and 1·33 times greater odds for IBS than fully dentate subjects, respectively. After controlling for different confounders, individuals who had denture had 103% greater odds to have constipation-predominant IBS than those with full dentition (95% confidence interval: 1·29-3·21). Neither in crude nor in adjusted models were any significant association between dental status and other subtypes of IBS. In addition, we did not find any association between losing half of one jaw or more and IBS. We found that losing 1-2 or 3-5 teeth might significantly be associated with increased risk of IBS. Having denture might be related to constipation-predominant IBS. There should be further prospective studies to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".