Tooth retention, health, and quality of life in older adults: a scoping review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review describes the relationship between tooth retention, health, and quality of life in older adults. METHODS: Seven databases were searched for English language articles for subjects ≥ 65 y from 1981 to 2021. Exposure was tooth retention (≥ 20), and outcomes were general/systemic health and quality of life. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. RESULTS: 140 articles were included, only four were randomized trials. Inter-rater agreement (κ) regarding study inclusion was 0.924. Most were assessed with low risk of bias (n = 103) and of good quality (n = 96). Most studies were conducted in Japan (n = 60) and Europe (n = 51) and only nine in the US. Tooth retention was referred to as "functional dentition" in 132 studies and "shortened dental arch" in 19 studies. Study outcomes were broadly synthesized as (1) cognitive decline/functional dependence, (2) health status/chronic diseases, (3) nutrition, and (4) quality of life. DISCUSSION: There is a positive relationship between tooth retention, overall health, and quality of life. Older adults retaining ≥ 20 teeth are less likely to experience poorer health. Having < 20 teeth increases the likelihood for functional dependence and onset of disability, and may affect successful ageing. This review supports the general finding that the more teeth older adults retain as they age, the less likely they are to have adverse health outcomes. However, significant knowledge gaps remain which can limit decision-making affecting successful ageing for many older adults. This review highlights the need to consider, as an important marker of oral health and function, the retention of a functional minimum of a natural dentition, rather than a simple numeric score of missing teeth.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it