Topical oral 1-tetradecanol complex in the treatment of periodontal diseases in cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the treatment of chronic periodontal disease with an oral application of tetradecanol complex (1-TDC) in cats. METHODS: The test group (n = 9) received 1-TDC (525 mg per gel capsule/day) and the placebo group (n = 4) received olive oil (0.25 ml per gel capsule/day) for 6 weeks. RESULTS: Oral treatment with 1-TDC resulted in significant reductions in all parameters of clinical periodontal disease except tooth mobility at 6 weeks. The 1-TDC group exhibited a statistically significant reduction in pocket depth, clinical attachment loss, gingival index and bleeding on probing after treatment at 6 weeks, whereas the placebo group did not show any significant change. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Chronic inflammation associated with periodontal diseases leads to periodontal tissue destruction. As a result, modulation of the host response has been included in the treatment protocol for periodontal diseases. Fatty acids present anti-inflammatory properties and are being investigated for use in the treatment and prevention of progressive periodontal diseases.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".