Association of onabotulinum toxin A treatment with salivary <scp>pH</scp> and dental caries of neurologically impaired children with sialorrhea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sialorrhea is a common manifestation of several neurological disorders. The use of intraglandular onabotulinum toxin A (OBTXA) injection has been recognized to effectively treat sialorrhea. As OBTXA injection reduces salivary flow rate and alters salivary quality, its use may have a detrimental effect on oral health. AIM: To examine the effect of OBTXA injection on caries experience and salivary pH of neurologically impaired children with sialorrhea. DESIGN: Twenty-five children receiving OBTXA treatment and 25 control children were enrolled in the study. Whole saliva was collected to determine salivary pH. All participants underwent an interview on their dietary habits. Dental clinical examinations were carried out to evaluate caries experience and oral hygiene level. RESULTS: Overall, mean salivary pH value was significantly lower in the OBTXA group (6.92 ± 0.77) compared with the control group (7.36 ± 0.70). Caries activity was significantly higher in the OBTXA group (P = 0.01). The regression analyses showed a significant association between OBTXA treatment and salivary pH value (P = 0.03). Results from the logistic regression show that dental caries was significantly associated with OBTXA treatment (OR = 1.73, CI = 1.14-27.3). CONCLUSIONS: The study showed an intricate relationship between OBTXA treatment and oral findings. Hence, special dental care should be given to children receiving OBTXA treatment.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".