MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183245968

The dental health status of dialysis patients.

2002· article· en· W2183245968 on OpenAlexaffabout
Judith Klassen, Brenda M. Krasko

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDialysisPeritoneal dialysisHemodialysisDiabetes mellitusKidney diseaseIntensive care medicineImmunosuppressionInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The number of patients with kidney failure who require dialysis is growing by 10% to 15% annually, and the likelihood that dentists will treat such patients is also increasing. The dental care of patients undergoing dialysis can be complex, given the prevalence of comorbid conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, renal osteodystrophy and immunosuppression, the presence of nondental prosthetic devices, and the use of antihypertensives and anticoagulants or antiplatelet agents. These patients appear to be predisposed to a variety of dental problems such as periodontal disease, narrowing of the pulp chamber, enamel abnormalities, premature tooth loss and xerostomia. Dental care, as well as primary preventive measures, seems to have been neglected in these patients. Therefore, a study of the dental health of dialysis patients was undertaken. METHOD: Completion of a questionnaire and a noninvasive oral examination was obtained from hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis patients registered in the dialysis program at St. Paul's Hospital in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, as of March 1, 1999. Information was also gathered from the medical chart. Medication history as well as history of diabetes, hypertension, and nondental prosthetic devices were also recorded. RESULTS: Of 226 dialysis patients in central and northern Saskatchewan, 147 were interviewed and examined. Of these, 94 (64%) were dentate, and the same number had been on dialysis for a mean of more than 2 years; about a third were diabetic, almost all were hypertensive and all had nondental prosthetic devices or arteriovenous fistulae, or both. Sixty (64%) of the dentate patients were candidates for kidney transplantation. Most of the dentate patients reported brushing once or more daily, but they flossed infrequently or never. Dental visits were infrequent, less than every 5 years in 59 (63%) of the dentate patients. Findings in the dentate group included increased tooth mobility, fractures, erosion, attrition, recession, gingivitis and a high plaque index. A patient's dentist was contacted if the patient had seen him or her since starting dialysis (31 of the 94 dentate patients). Most (81%) of the dentists were aware that they were treating a dialysis patient. Medication records were incomplete for 29% of the patients, and only 2 (6%) of the patients had received antibiotic prophylaxis despite the fact that all had prosthetic devices or arteriovenous fistulae. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: We conclude that the dental health of dialysis patients is poor and requires greater attention.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.269
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations246
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOral microbiology and periodontitis researchFrench-language works237,207