Association between developmental defects of enamel and early childhood caries in children under 6 years old: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early childhood caries (ECC) are an oral health problem worldwide in children under 6 years of age. This disease of rapid development has a multifactorial etiology, and one of the possible risk factors is developmental defects of enamel (DDE), such as hypoplasia and opacities. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the association between DDE and ECC in children under 6 years of age. An electronic search was conducted until March 2022 using Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Science-Direct, LILACS, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EBSCO-Host, EMBASE, and Google Scholar and complemented with a manual search, with no restrictions on language or date of publication. Longitudinal studies of children under 6 years of age with primary dentition were included. A total of 1158 studies were found, of which 651 records were reviewed by title and abstract, and 24 articles were selected for full-text evaluation. Finally, nine studies that met the selection criteria were included in the qualitative synthesis. Study quality and certainty were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. Three cohort studies of good quality were included in the meta-analysis. A risk associated with DDE (RR = 1.94; 95% CI: 1.52-2.49) and a risk associated with enamel hypoplasia (RR = 5.45; 95% CI: 1.84-16.14) were found. The results for diffuse opacity (RR = 1.21; 95% CI: 0.18-8.15) and demarcated opacity (RR = 1.26; 95% CI: 0.43-3.65) were not significant. GRADE analysis presented low and very low certainty of evidence. It was concluded that there is an association between DDE and ECC. However, the results should be interpreted with caution because of the limitations of the study. The protocol for this study has been registered in PROSPERO under identification number CRD42021238919.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".