Relationships of Candida with Frequency of Brushing, Age and Smoking in Patients with Removable Dental Prosthesis: A Quantitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Although progress has been made to reduce opportunistic infection of fungi in the oral cavity, the prevalence of denture stomatitis associated with Candida has increased. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of denture cleaning frequencies, age and smoking habit on the levels of Candida species in the saliva of patients wearing removable partial or complete dentures. Methods: Subjects wearing removable partial or complete dentures were recruited. A questioner was used to collect information on oral hygiene habits and smoking. Saliva samples were collected by oral rinse technique in a sterile container and cultured in duplicate Sabouraud Dextrose Agar. The numbers of colonies were determined by aCOLyte colony counter and the number expressed as a colony forming unit (CFU). The CFU and clinical data were analyzed for correlation and the Kruskal-Wallis test was used to determine statistically significant differences. Results: Among 99 subjects recruited, 47 were wearing complete dentures and 28 were smokers. The brushing frequencies were once (37 subjects), twice (39 subjects) and three times (23 subjects) per day. CFU was significantly higher in partial denture wearers than complete denture wearers and the brushing frequencies significantly correlated with CFU (r = -0.85, P= 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in CFU between smokers and non-smokers and no correlation of CFU with age was found. Conclusions: This quantitative study has suggested that there are statistically significant differences in the levels of Candida in the saliva of subjects with different brushing frequencies and wearing a different type of denture. However, no statistically significant difference was noticed between smokers and non-smokers, and there was no significant correlation between CFU and age. Download Statistics Article view 10 Downloads 1 Published at 2017-12-01 How to cite RIS EndNote HARVARD Mendeley BibTeX APA MLA VANCOUVER Share logo Sulai
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".