MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338493661 · doi:10.1111/ipd.12233

A systematic review on the association between molar incisor hypomineralization and dental caries

2016· review· en· W2338493661 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gabriela Caldeira Andrade Americano, Pernille Endrup Jacobsen, Vera Mendes Soviero, Dorte Haubek

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Paediatric Dentistry · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Dental Protein Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDentistryMolarAssociation (psychology)OrthodonticsIncisor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Molar incisor hypomineralization (MIH) is a defect of enamel. The lower strength of the enamel can lead to fractures that predispose for plaque accumulation and caries. AIM: This systematic review aimed to assess the association between MIH and caries. DESIGN: Studies involving children of all ages, which reported results on MIH and caries in the permanent dentition, were considered eligible. A search was performed in PubMed and was limited to the period from January 2003 to November 2015, and to studies written in English. Reviews, meta-analyses, and case reports were excluded. The studies were evaluated by use of the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). RESULTS: Seventeen publications were compiled in the review. Most publications reported that children with MIH have higher caries experience. One study did not observe a difference in DMF values among children affected or not by MIH. Three studies reported that children with MIH were 2.1 to 4.6 times more likely to have caries in the permanent dentition than children without MIH. CONCLUSIONS: A significant association between MIH and caries was found. The results should, however, be interpreted cautiously due to the lack of high-quality studies. The present systematic review confirms the need for further well-designed studies.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations245
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Paediatric DentistrySame topicBone and Dental Protein StudiesFrench-language works237,207