MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142782151 · doi:10.3346/jkms.2021.36.e98

Smoking and Drinking Adjusted Association between Head and Neck Cancers and Oral Health Status Related to Periodontitis: a Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W3142782151 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Huong Vu, Mi-Sun Kong, Hyun‐Duck Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Korean Medical Science · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsMedicinePeriodontitisMeta-analysisHead and neckAssociation (psychology)Head and neck cancerOral CancersOncologyOral healthInternal medicineDentistryCancerSurgeryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Not so many reports about the association between head and neck cancer (HNC) and oral health status related to periodontitis (OHS-P) has been published in different countries with different methods. So, there is a need for an extensive meta-analysis with the total articles published until 2020. Hence, this study aimed to estimate the association between HNC and OHS-P through a meta-analysis. METHODS: Based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines, 22 studies were selected through PubMed and Cochrane Library databases. Meta-analysis using them was performed to evaluate the association. The risk of bias assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was applied to evaluate the quality of non-randomized studies. Publication bias was evaluated by funnel plot and Egger's regression test. RESULTS: = 0.66). Moreover, the association was higher in 10 fair or good NOS studies (OR, 3.08) and in 7 Asian studies (OR, 2.68), which were from the fixed model without publication bias. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis showed that bad OHS-P was associated with the risk of HNC. The association was stronger in studies using ABL or CAL for assessing periodontitis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.053
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Korean Medical ScienceSame topicOral microbiology and periodontitis researchFrench-language works237,207