Efficacy of Dentaq® Oral and ENT Health Probiotic Complex on Clinical Parameters of Gingivitis in Patients Undergoing Fixed Orthodontic Treatment: A Pilot Study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Probiotics act as a unique approach to maintaining oral health by supplementing the endogenous oral bacteria with additional naturally occurring beneficial microbes to provide defense against pathogens harmful to teeth and gingiva. The aim of this pilot study was to clinically evaluate the effects of probiotics on plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation in subjects with fixed orthodontics. METHODS: The pilot study was comprised of 15 healthy patients, aged 11 to 18 years, undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment. Patients used an all-natural, dissolving lozenge containing six proprietary probiotic strains (Dentaq® Oral and ENT Health Probiotic Complex)for 28 days. Gingival Index (GI) according to Löe-Silness and Plaque Index (PI) according to Quigley-Hein for all teeth were measured at baseline (Day Zero) and at the end of the probiotic regimen (Day 28). RESULTS: The mean baseline GI and PI scores within each patient decreased by 28.4% and 35.8%, respectively, by Day 28. Patients reported decreased tooth and gingival pain, decreased oral bleeding, and increased motivation to maintain proper oral hygiene over the course of the study. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study provided preliminary support for the use of Dentaq Oral and ENT Health Probiotic Complex as a safe and effective natural health product for the reduction of plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation. The results demonstrate its potential therapeutic value and open the door for larger scale placebo-controlled clinical studies to verify these findings.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".