MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081986403 · doi:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_90_20

The relationship between DMFT index and cognitive impairment: A descriptive cross-sectional study

2020· article· en· W3081986403 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Moein Abbaslou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Medicine and Primary Care · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitionCross-sectional studyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentResidenceDentistryDemographyCognitive impairmentPsychiatryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Aims: Cognitive disorders are characterized by major impairments in functions such as memory, judgment, language and attention. One of the tests used to assess these disorders is called the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test, which is one of the most recent tests known in this field. DMFT index is the most important dental index for evaluation of decayed, missing and filled teeth. Since alteration or damage to the sensory function of teeth can cause changes in chewing function and different levels of cognitive disorders. The objective of this study was to determine the relationship of DMFT index with cognitive disorders in people aged 25-55 in Rafsanjan in 2019. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed on 350 patients chosen by simple random sampling within age range of 25-55 years, referred to Rafsanjan Dental School in 2019. Patients' demographic information was recorded and each was given a consent form and also Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test. Dental examination regarding decayed, missing and filled teeth was then carried out by a dentist and The DMFT index was recorded. Data were then analyzed by SPSS version 21; P value less than 0.05 was considered as significant level. Results: Data showed that the MOCA index had a negative significant relationship with DMFT ( P = 0.001) and age ( P = 0.001) and had a significant positive relationship with education ( P = 0.001), but it had no significant relationship with gender ( P = 0.853), time of last dental appointment ( P = 0.231) and place of residence ( P = 0.428). The effect of age ( P = 0.67) and gender ( P = 0.525) on the relationship of DMFT and MOCA was not significant. But the effect of education ( P = 0.001), place of residence ( P = 0.0003) and time of last dental appointment ( P = 0.002) on it was significant. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that the relationship between DMFT index and cognitive disorders was significant and the higher the score of this index, the more severe cognitive disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family Medicine and Primary CareSame topicDental Health and Care UtilizationFrench-language works237,207