Effect of Honey on Orthodontic Tooth Movement and Osteoclastic Activity in Psychologically Stressed Animals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Orthodontics is a clinical specialty in dentistry related to the correction of dentofacial deformities. Psychological stress factors delay Orthodontic tooth movement (OTM). Honey can be considered a useful and harmless natural product to reduce stress levels, hence improves the efficacy of OTM.
 Aims & Objectives: To compare the differences in the rate of tooth movement and osteoclastic activity between control, psychologically stressed and honey treated psychologically stressed groups after 1 week of orthodontic force application in an animal model.
 Place and duration of study: This experimental study was conducted at the animal research laboratory and Histopathology Department of Post Graduate Medical Institute (PGMI), Lahore, Pakistan, from April 2019 to June 2020.
 Material & Methods: Thirty-six Sprague Dawley rats were randomly divided into A, B and C groups. Psychological Stress was induced in group A (PS group) while Honey was given orally as a therapeutic agent along with induction of psychological stress in group B (PSH group), and group C was the Control Group. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 24 software. The quantitative variables were the orthodontic tooth movement, the osteoclast count, and the expression of RANKL. One-way ANOVA was applied to calculate the mean difference and Post hoc Tukey test applied for multiple comparisons among the groups. A p-value ? 0.05 was considered statistically significant in all 3 groups.
 Results: There was a significant difference (p-value <0.05) between control and experimental groups in the orthodontic tooth movement and levels of RANKL, however, there was no significant difference between PS and PSH groups.
 Conclusion: Psychological stress delays orthodontic tooth movement by causing a reduction in its rate and osteoclastic activity and honey has no significant correlation with lowering stress levels, hence does not improve orthodontic tooth movement efficiency.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".