Dental Findings in Patients With Non-surgical Hypoparathyroidism and Pseudohypoparathyroidism: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Dental aberrations have been mentioned in relation to non-surgical hypoparathyroidism (Ns-HypoPT) and pseudohypoparathyroidism (PHP). However, a systematic review of dental characteristics have not been performed. The present systematic review describes the dental findings in patients with Ns-HypoPT and PHP. Methods: Studies on Ns-HypoPT and PHP reporting dental features were eligible. A systematic literature search was conducted using four bibliographic databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Pubmed and Embase) and was limited to studies written in English. Reviews, meta-analyses and letters were excluded. Both the research and reporting of results were based on PRISMA (preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Results: Of 88 studies included, nine were cross-sectional, one was a prospective cohort study, 26 were case series, and 52 were case reports. The most frequently reported findings in patients with Ns-HypoPT were enamel opacities, enamel hypoplasia, hypodontia, and eruption disturbances. In patients with PHP, enamel hypoplasia, eruption disturbance, and deviation of the root morphology were the most frequently reported findings. Conclusion: An association between enamel hypoplasia and Ns-HypoPT and PHP is likely. The results should, however, be interpreted cautiously due to the limited number of high-quality studies. The present review confirms the need of further well-designed studies, such as large-scale studies, e.g., multicenter studies, to conclude on the reported associations between Ns-HypoPT/PHP and enamel hypoplasia.
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 | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".