Fluoride Intake and Prevalence of Dental Fluorosis: Trends in Fluoride Intake with Special Attention to Infants: REVIEW & COMMENTARY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the predominant beneficial effect of fluoride occurs locally in the mouth, the adverse effect, dental fluorosis, occurs by the systemic route. The caries attack rate in industrialized countries, including the United States and Canada, has decreased dramatically over the past 40 years. However, the prevalence of dental fluorosis in the United States has increased during the last 30 years both in communities with fluoridated water and in communities with nonfluoridated water. Dental fluorosis is closely associated with fluoride intake during the period of tooth development. METHODS: We reviewed the major changes in infant feeding practices that have occurred since 1930 and the changes in fluoride intakes by infants and young children associated with changes in feeding practices. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Based on this review, we conclude that fluoride intakes of infants and children have shown a rather steady increase since 1930, are likely to continue to increase, and will be associated with further increase in the prevalence of enamel fluorosis unless intervention measures are instituted. RECOMMENDATIONS: We believe the most important measures that should be undertaken are (1) use, when feasible, of water low in fluoride for dilution of infant formulas; (2) adult supervision of toothbrushing by children younger than 5 years of age; and (3) changes in recommendations for administration of fluoride supplements so that such supplements are not given to infants and more stringent criteria are applied for administration to children.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".