Relationship between Oral Function and Occlusal Bite Force in the Elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of hard tissue reconstruction in the oral and maxillofacial field is good oral function. However, research into oral function remains inadequate and methods for evaluating oral function have yet to be established. In this study, we report the relationship between oral function and occlusal bite force in the elderly. This study included 108 residents of Takatsuki City aged 60 years or older. Oral condition was assessed by measuring tooth loss and periodontal condition, and oral function was assessed based on masticatory performance indicators. Mean age was 75.5±4.8 years. As indicators of occlusal function, the means of maximum occlusal force, gummy jelly score (masticatory performance score) and time required for 30 chews were 313.5±234.8 N, 4.0 and 28.5±10.0 s, respectively. As indicators of oral function, the means of tongue pressure, salivary flow rate and lip pressure were 26.3±8.9 kPa, 1.5±0.93 g/min and 12.7±7.1 N, respectively. In this study, we report mean values for oral function in healthy elderly subjects. In the future, it will be necessary to clarify standard values for residents with various diseases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".