Association Between Periodontitis and Cognitive Impairment in Adults: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Periodontitis is an oral inflammatory disease and may contribute to low-grade systemic inflammation. Based on the contribution of periodontitis to systemic inflammation and the potential role of systemic inflammation in neuroinflammation, many epidemiological studies have investigated a possible association between periodontitis and mild cognitive impairment or dementia. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical/epidemiological evidence regarding the association between periodontitis and cognitive decline in adult patients. A search conducted between September and October 2018 was performed in the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, LILACS, OpenGrey, and Google Scholar, with no publication date or language restrictions. Analytical observational studies in adults (P-Participants), with (E-Exposure) and without periodontitis (C-Comparison) were included in order to determine the association between periodontitis and cognitive decline (O-Outcome). The search identified 509 references, of which eight observational studies were accorded with the eligibility criteria and evaluated. The results should, however, be interpreted cautiously due to the limited number of studies. This systematic review points to the need for further well-designed studies, such as longitudinal observational studies with control of modifiable variables, as diagnostic criteria and time since diagnosis of periodontitis and cognitive impairment, to confirm the proposed association.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".