MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081962463 · doi:10.5770/cgj.18.123

Prevalence and Distribution of Oral Mucosal Lesions in a Geriatric Indian Population

2015· article· en· W2081962463 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geriatrics Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral Health Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLeukoplakiaOral submucous fibrosisPyogenic granulomaPopulationArecaDermatologyDentistryOral healthStomatitisOral cavityBuccal mucosaOral mucosaBetelSurgeryInternal medicinePathologyLesionCancerEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Oral health is important to individuals of all age groups. Previous epidemiologic studies of the oral health status of the general population in India provided very little information about oral mucosal lesions in the elderly. Hence, the purpose of the present study was to determine the prevalence of the oral lesions in a geriatric Indian population. METHODS: 5,100 patients were clinically evaluated, with age ranging from 60 to 98 years. There were 3,100 males and 2,000 females, with a mean age of 69 ± 6.3 yrs. The statistical analysis was done using the SPSS software, where p < .05 was considered to be significant. RESULTS: 64% of the patients presented with one or more oral lesions, associated to tobacco, betel nut consumption, and lesions secondary to trauma and prosthesis. Males were more affected than females and this difference was clinically not significant (p > .05). The lesions were more frequently observed between 65 to 70 yrs. The most common alterations observed were smoker's palate (43%), denture stomatitis (34%), oral submucous fibrosis (30%), frictional keratosis (23%), leukoplakia (22%), and pyogenic granuloma (22%). Hard palate was the most commonly affected site (23.1%). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the present study provide important information when clinically evaluating oral cavity in elderly. Close follow-up and systematic evaluation is required in the elderly population to plan future treatment needs.

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)0.000
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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.273 · 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