Association between Oral Health Status and Cognitive Function among Geriatrics – A Cross Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Oral health disorders such as loss of teeth, periodontitis and root caries are associated with cognitive impairment in a group of elders.Objective: This study was designed to assess the association between oral health status and cognitive function among a community-dwelling geriatric population in Chennai. Materials and Methods:This was a cross sectional study involving 150 elderly from two geriatric institutions and two day care centers, who were interviewed and examined for oral health status and screened for cognitive function using Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test (MoCA).Results: Among 150 participants 53 (35.3%) had mild cognitive impairment (MCI) with a mean cognitive score of 22.17 (SD = 1.7), 73 (48.7%) had severe cognitive impairment (Dementia) with a mean cognitive score of 10.81 (SD = 5.4) and about 24 (16%) had normal cognition with a mean score of 27.08 (SD = 1.4).It was found that of the indices assessed, Russell's periodontal index had a negative association with cognitive function (R = -0.212).In the linear regression model, adjusted for age and education, Russell's periodontal index was a predictive factor for cognitive function among older adults. Conclusion:Periodontitis may serve as an early risk predictor for cognitive impairment among geriatrics.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".