Prevalence of oral diseases in Shwachman‐Diamond syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and severity of oral diseases in patients with ShwachmanDiamond syndrome (SDS). Thirty-five persons with SDS were compared to 20 healthy controls. A cross-sectional survey was carried out using self-reporting questionnaires and dental radiographs collected from the subjects and their dentists. Overall, oral diseases were more prevalent among subjects with SDS when compared to controls (p < 0.001). Persons with SDS also had more caries in both primary (p < 0.03) and permanent dentitions (p < 0.01), and also had delayed dental development (p < 0.04). Oral soft tissue pathoses, such as recurrent oral ulcerations (p < 0.00) and gingival bleeding upon brushing (p < 0.00), were significantly more prevalent in subjects with SDS. Pain on eating was also more frequent amongst persons with SDS (p < 0.008) and was often associated with oral ulcerations (p < 0.002). In conclusion, based on self-completed subject and dentist questionnaires, diseases of oral hard and soft tissues were more prevalent and severe in persons with SDS when compared with healthy controls.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".