Types of tobacco consumption and the oral microbiome in the United Arab Emirates Healthy Future (UAEHFS) Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cigarette smoking alters the oral microbiome; however, the effect of alternative tobacco products remains unclear. Middle Eastern tobacco products like dokha and shisha, are becoming globally widespread. We tested for the first time in a Middle Eastern population the hypothesis that different tobacco products impact the oral microbiome. The oral microbiome of 330 subjects from the United Arab Emirates Healthy Future Study was assessed by amplifying the bacterial 16S rRNA gene from mouthwash samples. Tobacco consumption was assessed using a structured questionnaire and further validated by urine cotinine levels. Oral microbiome overall structure and specific taxon abundances were compared, using PERMANOVA and DESeq analyses respectively. Our results show that overall microbial composition differs between smokers and nonsmokers (p = 0.0001). Use of cigarettes (p = 0.001) and dokha (p = 0.042) were associated with overall microbiome structure, while shisha use was not (p = 0.62). The abundance of multiple genera were significantly altered (enriched/depleted) in cigarette smokers; however, only Actinobacillus, Porphyromonas, Lautropia and Bifidobacterium abundances were significantly changed in dokha users whereas no genera were significantly altered in shisha smokers. For the first time, we show that smoking dokha is associated to oral microbiome dysbiosis, suggesting that it could have similar effects as smoking cigarettes on oral health.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".