Interleukin-6 levels in the serum and saliva of patients with oral lichen planus compared with healthy controls: a meta-analysis study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interleukin-6 (IL-6) is a cytokine that contributes to the pathogenesis of oral lichen planus (OLP). The aim of this meta-analysis study is the evaluation of IL-6 levels in the serum and saliva of patients with OLP compared with healthy controls. We searched the studies in 5 databases: PubMed/Medline, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, from 1983 to Oct 31, 2016. Eleven studies were analysed for the meta-analysis study. The reviewers independently evaluated the quality of each included study using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). A random-effects meta-analysis, using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 2.0, was used to reflect the variation in studies. Heterogeneity between estimates was evaluated by the Q and I2 statistics and for the Q statistic; heterogeneity was considered for p < 0.1. Eleven studies included 529 OLP patients and 333 healthy controls. The review identified two different biomaterials used for IL-6 assays: saliva and serum. The mean quality score of eleven studies was 7 (high quality). Estimates pooled from 6 studies showed significant high saliva IL-6 levels in OLP patients compared with healthy controls (the standardised difference in means (SDM) = 4.534, 95% CI = 1.915-7.153, p = 0.001). Also, estimates pooled from 7 studies showed significantly high serum IL-6 levels in OLP patients compared with healthy controls (SDM = 1.482, 95% CI = 0.524-2.439, p = 0.002). The higher levels of IL-6 in saliva compared with serum suggest that measurement of this marker in saliva may be more useful than serum for diagnostic and therapeutic aims.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it