MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140318265 · doi:10.1902/jop.2001.72.3.393

Dental Unit Waterline Contamination and Its Possible Implications During Periodontal Surgery

2001· article· en· W2140318265 on OpenAlexaff
Edward E. Putnins, Davide Di Giovanni, Amandeep Bhullar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Periodontology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiofilmMicrobiologyBacteriaDental plaqueLimulus amebocyte lysateContaminationPopulationMicroorganismWaterlineChemistryDentistryMedicineBiologyLipopolysaccharideImmunologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dental unit waterline contamination has become a concern to clinical dentistry. This concern arises from the fact that bacteria sloughed from established biofilms in dental unit waterlines increase heterotrophic bacteria counts in water exiting these units. METHODS: Scanning microscopy and bacterial viability staining were used to examine the sessile and planktonic biofilm present in dental unit waterlines and water samples, respectively. In addition, the limulus amebocyte assay was used to measure the lipopolysaccharide (LPS) levels in water samples. RESULTS: All dental unit waterlines were coated with a well-established biofilm made up of filamentous and bacillus-like microorganisms. Water samples collected from these dental units contained high numbers of individual bacteria and bacterial aggregates. A viability staining technique identified significantly more bacteria in water than could be cultured, and 64% of the total bacterial population stained as nonvital. Since the bacterial load (viable and nonviable) was high, we examined the LPS in dental unit water samples. The mean LPS levels in water collected from high-speed and air/water lines in use were 480 and 1,008 endotoxin units (EU)/ml. This was significantly higher than the mean level of 66 EU/ml found in water samples collected from adjacent clinic sinks. The LPS level at the start of the day (2,560 EU/ml) was reduced by 70% with 1 minute of flushing (800 EU/ml). Flushing times of 5 and 10 minutes were not able to reduce LPS levels to zero. CONCLUSION: The presence of high heterotrophic bacterial counts, sloughing biofilm, and high LPS levels are discussed in relation to patient risk and periodontal wound healing biology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations90
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PeriodontologySame topicOral microbiology and periodontitis researchFrench-language works237,207