Correlation of vitamin D status and orthodontic-induced external apical root resorption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Adequate Vitamin D is essential for dental and skeletal health in children and adult. The purpose of this study was to assess the correlation of serum Vitamin D level with external-induced apical root resorption (EARR) following fixed orthodontic treatment.Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, the prevalence of Vitamin D deficiency (defined by25-hydroxyvitamin-D) was determined in 34 patients (23.5% male; age range 12–23 years; mean age 16.63 ± 2.84) treated with fixed orthodontic treatment. Root resorption of four maxillary incisors was measured using before and after periapical radiographs (136 measured teeth) by means of a design-to-purpose software to optimize data collection. Teeth with a maximum percentage of root resorption (%EARR) were indicated as representative root resorption for each patient. A multiple linear regression model and Pearson correlation coefficient were used to assess the association of Vitamin D status and observed EARR. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The Pearson coefficient between these two variables was determined about 0.15 (P = 0.38). Regression analysis revealed that Vitamin D status of the patients demonstrated no significant statistical correlation with EARR, after adjustment of confounding variables using linear regression model (P > 0.05).Conclusion: This study suggests that Vitamin D level is not among the clinical variables that are potential contributors for EARR. The prevalence of Vitamin D deficiency does not differ in patients with higher EARR. These data suggest the possibility that Vitamin D insufficiency may not contribute to the development of more apical root resorption although this remains to be confirmed by further longitudinal cohort 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".