Evolving evidence for relationships between periodontitis and systemic diseases: Position paper from the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this position paper is to investigate the current state of the evidence for proposed associations between periodontitis and rheumatoid arthritis, Alzheimer's disease, obesity, inflammatory cancers, and renal disease using a narrative review approach. This is the last of a series of 5 position papers from the Canadian Dental Hygienists Association (CDHA) on the relationship between periodontitis and systemic conditions. Methods: Individual literature searches were conducted for each of the 5 proposed linkages and limited to human studies, with a preference for systematic reviews (SRs) and prospective studies, in the English language, published between 2015 and 2021, focused on associations between 1) periodontitis and rheumatoid arthritis; 2) periodontitis and Alzheimer's disease/cognitive impairment; 3) periodontitis and obesity; 4) periodontitis and inflammatory cancers; and 5) periodontitis and chronic kidney disease. Databases searched were PubMed, MEDLINE/OVID, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane Registry of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science. Results: A total of 39 papers were selected for discussion, including 6 SRs for rheumatoid arthritis; 7 SRs for Alzheimer's disease/cognitive impairment; 11 SRs, 1 meta-review of SRs, and 1 population-based cohort study for obesity; 9 SRs for inflammatory cancers; and 4 SRs for kidney disease. Conclusions: The evidence for the 5 proposed associations varied in strength, with obesity being most strongly associated with periodontal disease. More robust studies are recommended to clarify the exact nature of these associations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.051 | 0.138 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".