Dental caries prevalence in children with congenital heart disease – a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Poor oral health is related with bacteraemia that may lead to endocarditis in children with congenital heart disease (CHD). The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review to compare caries prevalence in children (<18 years of age) with CHD with healthy children. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A literature search of studies from two online databases (Pubmed (MEDLINE) and Scopus) published from January 2000 to October 2019 using Medical subject heading terms Congenital Heart Disease, Congenital Heart Defect, and Caries was done, and manual search from the reference lists of selected publications. PICO (Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison group, and Outcome) criteria was applied. Quality of the publications was assessed with the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: The search resulted in 151 articles of which nine fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Caries prevalence was significantly higher in children with CHD compared to healthy children in three out of nine studies. Information on predisposing background factors was limited but difference in caries prevalence was not attributed to SES. The quality of the studies varied. CONCLUSIONS: Although evidence is limited, the current literature indicates that children with CHD experience a higher caries prevalence compared to healthy children.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".