MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310219113 · doi:10.1002/mas.21822

Mass spectrometry‐based proteomic approaches for salivary protein biomarkers discovery and dental caries diagnosis: A critical review

2022· review· en· W4310219113 on OpenAlexaff
Paras Ahmad, Ahmed Hussain, Walter L. Siqueira

Bibliographic record

VenueMass Spectrometry Reviews · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProteomicsSalivaSalivary ProteinsComputational biologyChemistryBiomarkerBiomarker discoveryBioinformaticsBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dental caries is a multifactorial chronic disease resulting from the intricate interplay among acid-generating bacteria, fermentable carbohydrates, and several host factors such as saliva. Saliva comprises several proteins which could be utilized as biomarkers for caries prevention, diagnosis, and prognosis. Mass spectrometry-based salivary proteomics approaches, owing to their sensitivity, provide the opportunity to investigate and unveil crucial cariogenic pathogen activity and host indicators and may demonstrate clinically relevant biomarkers to improve caries diagnosis and management. The present review outlines the published literature of human clinical proteomics investigations on caries and extensively elucidates frequently reported salivary proteins as biomarkers. This review also discusses important aspects while designing an experimental proteomics workflow. The protein-protein interactions and the clinical relevance of salivary proteins as biomarkers for caries, together with uninvestigated domains of the discipline are also discussed critically.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations28
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMass Spectrometry ReviewsSame topicOral microbiology and periodontitis researchFrench-language works237,207