MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114497791 · doi:10.1177/2380084420981016

Tooth Loss and Nutritional Status in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3114497791 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJDR Clinical & Translational Research · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLTooth lossMedicineMeta-analysisDentitionMalnutritionMEDLINEScopusGerontologyDentistryPsychological interventionOral healthPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objective: Older adults are at risk for tooth loss and compromised nutritional status. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to answer the following question: Among adults aged ≥60 y living in developed countries, what are the associations between tooth loss and nutritional status as assessed by a validated nutrition screening or assessment tool? Methods: PRISMA guidelines were followed. PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, and MEDLINE were searched for studies published in English between 2009 and 2019 that met inclusion criteria. Data extracted included study and participant characteristics, dentition, and nutritional status. Risk of bias was assessed with a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random effects meta-analysis was used. Results: Of the 588 unduplicated articles identified, 78 were reviewed in full text, and 7 met inclusion criteria. Six studies were combined for a meta-analysis, which revealed that individuals who were completely edentulous or who lacked functional dentition had a 21% increased likelihood of being at risk of malnutrition or being malnourished, as compared with those who were dentulous or had functionally adequate dentition (risk ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.32; I 2 = 70%). Whether the article statistically adjusted for medical history explained most of the heterogeneity in the pooled effect. Conclusions and Implications: Findings suggest that older adults with tooth loss are at greater risk of malnutrition than those with functionally adequate dentition. Use of validated tools to assess risk of malnutrition in older adults with tooth loss is important to promote early intervention and referral to optimize nutrition and oral health status. Findings were limited by heterogeneity, risk of bias, and overall quality of the studies reviewed. Cohort studies that adjust for known confounders and use consistent approaches to assess tooth loss and nutritional status are needed. Knowledge Transfer Statement: The results of this study suggest that older adults with tooth loss are at greater risk of malnutrition than those with functionally adequate dentition. Screening of this population for malnutrition by health care professionals, including dentists and dietitians, may result in corresponding referrals to optimize nutrition and oral health status. Further research is needed with consistent approaches to assess tooth loss and nutritional status.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.357
GPT teacher head0.574
Teacher spread0.217 · 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