MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2911586911

Assessment of the Effects of a Novel Stabilized Stannous Fluoride Dentifrice on Gingivitis in a Two-Month Positive-Controlled Clinical Study.

2017· article· en· W2911586911 on OpenAlexaff
Tao He, Rachelle Eusebio, C Ram Goyal, Jimmy Qaqish

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsAll Sum Research Center (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDentifriceTriclosanGingivitisMedicineFluorideDentistryRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the antibleeding/antigingivitis effectiveness of a newly formulated 0.454% stabilized stannous fluoride dentifrice and a marketed positive control triclosan-containing dentifrice in adults with mild-to-moderate gingivitis. METHODS: This single-center, two-month, randomized and controlled, double-blind, parallel group clinical trial involved adults with preexisting mild-to-moderate gingivitis. Baseline bleeding and gingivitis levels were assessed with the Gingival Bleeding Index (GBI) and Lobene Modified Gingival Index (MGI). Subjects were randomly assigned to either a new smooth formula 0.454% stabilized stannous fluoride test dentifrice (Crest® Pro-Health™) or a commercially available positive control 0.30% triclosan dentifrice (Colgate® Total®). Subjects brushed with their assigned dentifrice at home according to the manufacturer's instructions. At Month 2, subjects were re-evaluated for bleeding and gingivitis as at Baseline, with MGI and GBI evaluations. RESULTS: Of the 200 subjects randomized to treatment, 197 completed the study and had fully evaluable data. At Month 2, both the stannous fluoride and triclosan control dentifrices produced statistically significant reductions (p < 0.0001) in the mean number of bleeding sites, MGI, and GBI compared to Baseline. Use of this 0.454% stannous fluoride dentifrice resulted in 22% fewer bleeding sites versus the positive control triclosan dentifrice (p < 0.0001). Similarly, after two months of brushing, the stannous fluoride dentifrice group showed statistically significant lower mean MGI and GBI scores than subjects using the triclosan positive control dentifrice (p < 0.0001). Both dentifrices were well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects brushing with a newly formulated stannous fluoride dentifrice had statistically significantly fewer bleeding sites and less gingivitis than those using a positive control triclosan dentifrice after two months.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicOral microbiology and periodontitis research→French-language works237,207→