MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308586632 · doi:10.7717/peerj.13864

Treatment for dental erosion: a systematic review of <i>in vitro</i> studies

2022· review· en· W4308586632 on OpenAlexaff
Yago Gecy de Sousa Né, Deiweson Souza‐Monteiro, Déborah Ribeiro Frazão, María Olimpia Paz Alvarenga, Walessa Alana Bragança Aragão, NatháliaCarolina Fernandes Fagundes, Renata Duarte de Souza‐Rodrigues, Rafael Rodrigues Lima

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Erosion and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDentistrySystematic reviewScopusToothpasteMedicineMEDLINEEnamel paintGrey literatureWeb of scienceFluorideMeta-analysisInternal medicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Dental erosion is a chemical loss of the mineralized dental tissue caused by exposure to nonbacterial acids. Different treatment protocols have been adopted with the use of fluoride compounds to promote the formation of a layer of mineral precipitation in eroded lesions. Aim This systematic review aimed to evaluate the main treatments for dental erosion. Methodology This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and recorded in the Open Science Framework database (OSF) under DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/XMFNZ . The searches were conducted in six electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, Lilacs) and two grey literature sources (Google Scholar and OpenGrey). The eligibility criteria included in vitro studies that evaluated eroded teeth under treatment with some topical agent. Risk of bias assessment and qualitative synthesis were performed using the Cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias modified for in vitro studies. Results A total of 522 studies were identified, and only four studies that fulfilled our eligibility criteria were included in this review. Among these studies, three were considered to have a low risk of bias, and one to have a high risk of bias. Two studies evaluated the anti-erosion effect of fluoride toothpaste, and the other two assessed the action of casein phosphopeptide–amorphous calcium phosphate (CPP-ACP) on the surface of human teeth. Among the products analyzed, CPP-ACP was the only one that promoted a significant increase in enamel microhardness and reduced tooth wear. Conclusion Based on the in vitro studies included in this review, there was no anti-erosion effect after using different fluoride toothpaste. However, it should be considered that one of these studies presented a high risk of bias. On the other hand, studies with CPP-ACP showed anti-erosion efficacy when applied before or after erosive wear.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.014
Bibliometrics0.0110.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicDental Erosion and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207