Poor oral hygiene, oral microorganisms and aspiration pneumonia risk in older people in residential aged care: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: aspiration pneumonia increases hospitalisation and mortality of older people in residential aged care. OBJECTIVES: determine potentially pathogenic microorganisms in oral specimens of older people with aspiration pneumonia and the effect of professional oral care in reducing aspiration pneumonia risk. DATA SOURCES: PUBMED/MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, COCHRANE, PROQUEST, Google Scholar, Web of Science. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: published between January 2001 and December 2019 addressing oral microorganisms, aspiration pneumonia, oral health and treatment. PARTICIPANTS: people 60 years and older in residential aged care. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Intervention Trials checklist. RESULTS: twelve studies (four cross-sectional, five cohort and three intervention) reported colonisation of the oral cavity of older people by microorganisms commonly associated with respiratory infections. Aspiration pneumonia occurred less in people who received professional oral care compared with no such care. Isolation of Candida albicans, Staphylococcus aureus, methicillin-resistant S. aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa was related to mortality due to aspiration pneumonia. An interesting finding was isolation of Escherichia coli, a gut bacterium. LIMITATIONS: more information may be present in publications about other co-morbidities that did not meet inclusion criteria. A high degree of heterogeneity prevented a meta-analysis. Issues included sampling size, no power and effect size calculations; different oral health assessments; how oral specimens were analysed and how aspiration pneumonia was diagnosed. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: pathogenic microorganisms colonising the oral microbiome are associated with aspiration pneumonia in older people in residential care; professional oral hygiene care is useful in reducing aspiration pneumonia risk.
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 | 0.005 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".