Effect of scaling and root planing with and without minocycline HCl microspheres on periodontal pathogens and clinical outcomes: A randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background This study tests the effects of scaling and root planing (SRP) versus SRP plus minocycline hydrochloride microspheres (SRP+MM) on 11 periodontal pathogens and clinical outcomes in Stage II‐IV Grade B periodontitis participants. Methods Seventy participants were randomized to receive SRP ( n = 35) or SRP+MM ( n = 35). Saliva and clinical outcomes were collected for both groups at baseline before SRP, 1‐month reevaluation, and at 3‐ and 6‐month periodontal recall. MM were delivered to pockets ≥5 mm immediately after SRP and immediately after the 3‐month periodontal maintenance in the SRP+MM group. A proprietary saliva test * was utilized to quantitate 11 putative periodontal pathogens. Microorganisms and clinical outcomes were compared between groups using generalized linear mixed‐effects models with fixed effects and random effects terms. Mean changes from baseline were compared between groups via group‐by‐visit interaction tests. Results Significant reduction in Tannerella forsythia, Treponema denticola, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Prevotella intermedia, Parvimonas micra , and Eikenella corrodens were identified at the 1‐month reevaluation after SRP+MM. Six months after SRP with a re‐application of MM 3 months after SRP, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Prevotella intermedia, Campylobacter rectus , and Eikenella corrodens were significantly reduced. SRP+MM participants had significant clinical outcome reductions in pockets ≥5 mm at the reevaluation, 3‐ and 6‐month periodontal maintenance, and clinical attachment loss gains at the 6‐month periodontal maintenance. Conclusion MM delivered immediately after SRP and reapplication at 3 months appeared to contribute to improved clinical outcomes and sustained decreased numbers of Fusobacterium nucleatum, Prevotella intermedia , Campylobacter rectus , and Eikenella corrodens at 6 months.
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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".