Association between Four Dietary Patterns and the Risk of Periodontal Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several dietary patterns are reported as risk factors for several chronic diseases including oral diseases. However, thus far, there has been no comprehensive quantitative analysis of nutrition and periodontal diseases. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies were eligible for inclusion in this study. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to qualitatively assess the risk of bias in the included studies. The number of samples was used for odds ratio calculation, followed by the unadjusted value and 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Nine papers were included for the systematic review and meta-analysis. The results of screening for database search records showed that four diet patterns (western diet, dairy product intake, sugar intake, and vitamin C intake) have enough data for meta-analysis. The risk of periodontal disease in the western-diet group and the lowest dairy product intake group was 1.05 (0.51-2.13) and 1.28 (0.89-1.84), respectively. The risk of periodontal disease in the highest sugar intake group and the lowest vitamin C intake group was 1.52 (0.79-2.91) and 1.15 (1.08-1.23), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With aging of the population globally, the prevalence of periodontal disease increases, and the associated cost also increases. Though this study, we found foods related to the risk of periodontal disease, and we are confident that it will contribute to lowering the incidence of the disease.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".