Biomarkers in biological fluids in adults with periodontitis and/or obesity: A meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity and periodontal diseases have been investigated to be interconnected, but the molecular mechanism underlying this association is still not clear. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the association of serum, salivary and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) inflammatory markers (IMs), obesity, and periodontitis. Studies that evaluated IM of adults according to obesity status (O) and periodontitis status (P) (O+P+; O-P+; O+P-) were screened on several electronic databases and grey literature up until February 2019. Risk of bias assessment and level of evidence were evaluated through Fowkes and Fulton scale and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Meta-analyses were grouped according to the biological matrix studied (serum/GCF) and groups (O+P+ vs. O-P+/O+P+ vs. O+P-). Out of the 832 studies screened, 21 were considered in qualitative synthesis and 15 in quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). Although included studies showed mostly "no" or "minor" problems during the quality assessment, GRADE assessment indicated very low to moderate level of evidence based on the question answered. O+P+ adults exhibited significantly higher serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6), leptin, and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-alpha) and higher resistin GCF levels than O-P+. O+P+ adults showed significantly higher serum levels of IL-6 and leptin and lower adiponectin serum levels than O+P-. Only qualitative information could be obtained of the IM vaspin, omentin-1, chemerin, IL-10, progranulin, MCP-4, IL-1β, and interferon-γ (IFN-γ). Obesity and periodontitis, together or separately, are associated with altered serum and GCF levels of CRP, IL-6, leptin, TNF-alpha, adiponectin, and resistin. It was not possible to evaluate the association between obesity and periodontitis at salivary levels. The role of recently investigated biomarkers as vaspin, omentin-1, chemerin, IL-10, progranulin, MCP-4, IL-1β, and IFN-γ, which can be key points underlying the association between obesity and periodontitis, remains to be further investigated.
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 | 0.014 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.058 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".