Association between Diet and Xerostomia: Is Xerostomia a Barrier to a Healthy Eating Pattern?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. Xerostomia is a subjective feeling of dry mouth and is commonly observed in patients with autoimmune diseases. Our study examines the association between xerostomia and diet. Materials and Methods. The cross-sectional study includes 1405 adults from 15 Lithuanian geographical areas (52% response rate). A self-reported questionnaire inquired about xerostomia, sex, age, education, residence, and consumption of selected 23 diet items. For the multivariable analysis, 23 diet items were categorized into eight major diet groups. The data were analyzed by bivariate and multivariable analyses. Results. When comparing participants with and without xerostomia, there were significant differences in consumption frequencies concerning cold-pressed oil (p = 0.013), bread (p = 0.029), processed meat products (p = 0.016), fat and lean fish (p = 0.009), and probiotic supplements (p = 0.002). In the multivariable binary logistic regression model, when controlled for other determinants, the higher consumption of carbohydrates (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.23–0.65), proteins (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32–0.99), and oils (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34–1.00) was associated with a lower likelihood of xerostomia. Conclusions. The association between xerostomia and the consumption of the six diet items—cold-pressed oils, lean and fat fish, bread, processed meat, and probiotic supplements— and the three major diet groups—carbohydrates, proteins, and oils—was observed. Longitudinal studies are needed to validate the observed associations.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".