Are Dental Caries Associated with Oxidative Stress in Saliva in Children and Adolescents? A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to assess whether dental caries is associated with oxidative salivary stress. The searches were carried out in electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, LILACS, OpenGrey, and Google Scholar, without restrictions on the date of publication and language. The acronym PECO was used, in which the participants (P) were children and adolescents exposed (E) to dental caries compared (C) to those without dental caries, with the outcome (O) of modulation of oxidative biochemical parameters. After the search retrieval, the duplicates were removed, and the articles were evaluated by title and abstract, following the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Then, the papers were read and thoroughly assessed. After selection, the risk of bias assessment and qualitative synthesis were performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational studies. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to assess the level of evidence. A total of 5790 studies were found, and 30 articles were considered eligible and were included for the qualitative synthesis and the level of evidence assessment. The studies showed an imbalance of the antioxidant and pro-oxidant parameters in individuals with dental caries, with primarily increases in both total antioxidant capacity and lipid peroxidation. Most articles showed a low risk of bias, having comparability as the main issue. When exploring through GRADE, a very low level of evidence was found. It was possible to observe an association between oxidative stress and dental caries, showing a disbalance of antioxidants and pro-oxidants, but the evidence level was still very low.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".