MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295997708 · doi:10.1159/000526942

Salivary Proteins as Dental Caries Biomarkers: A Systematic Review

2022· review· en· W4295997708 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Paras Ahmad, Ahmed Hussain, Alonso Carrasco‐Labra, Walter L. Siqueira

Bibliographic record

VenueCaries Research · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSalivary Gland Disorders and Functions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSalivaSalivary ProteinsMedicineMucinScopusAmylaseDentistryInternal medicinePhysiologyMEDLINEBioinformaticsBiologyPathologyEnzymeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Salivary proteins play an important role in repairing mechanisms of damaged tissues and the maintenance of oral health. However, there is a dearth of information in the literature regarding the concentrations of salivary proteins in caries-free (CF) and caries-active (CA) subjects. Hence, this systematic review was conducted to update our previous systematic review published in 2013 that aimed to assess the association between caries and salivary proteins by comparing CF and CA individuals. Thereby, evaluating the possibility of whether salivary proteins can be regarded as biomarkers for caries. An extensive search of studies was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Clarivate Analytics' Web of Science, and Elsevier's Scopus between July 2012 and January 2022, without any language restriction. Manual searching in Google Scholar and evaluation of bibliographies of the included studies were also undertaken. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias (RoB) within the included studies. Of 22 included studies, 1,551 human subjects (range: 30-213 participants) were recruited, of which 848 individuals (54.7%) were CA and 703 (45.3%) were CF. Regarding the utilization of DMFT as the caries index, high variability was observed across different articles. A statistically significant increase in the salivary levels of alpha-amylase, acidic proline-rich protein-1, histatin-5, lactoperoxidase, and mucin-1 was found in CA patients, while the salivary levels of carbonic anhydrase 6, proteinase-3, and statherin were observed to be significantly increased in CF subjects. Conflicting results were found regarding the salivary levels of immunoglobulin A and total proteins among CA and CF subjects. The included studies were categorized as low RoB (n = 15), medium RoB (n = 4), and high RoB (n = 3). Due to significant heterogeneity among the included studies, no meta-analysis could be performed. In conclusion, the salivary levels of protein(s) might be a useful biomarker for caries diagnosis, especially alpha-amylase, acidic proline-rich protein-1, histatin-5, lactoperoxidase, mucin-1, carbonic anhydrase 6, proteinase-3, and statherin. However, their diagnostic value must be verified by large-scale prospective studies.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.007
Bibliometrics0.0130.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.218
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations50
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCaries ResearchSame topicSalivary Gland Disorders and FunctionsFrench-language works237,207