MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386142284 · doi:10.1186/s12903-023-03305-3

Association between oral hypofunction and general health: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4386142284 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nareudee Limpuangthip, Orapin Komin

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Oral Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDysphagia Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFaculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn UniversityChulalongkorn University
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Oral hygienePopulationGerontologyDentistryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Oral hypofunction comprises 7 oral function conditions, including mastication, swallowing, pronouncing, oral hygiene, and oral dryness. However, it remains unresolved whether having oral hypofunction and each individual condition adversely affect general health. This study aimed to investigate the association between oral hypofunction and general health, encompassing physical, psychological, and social dimensions. METHODS: Oral hypofunction was diagnosed following the criteria proposed by the 2016 Japan Society of Gerodontology, comprising 7 oral function conditions. Oral hypofunction was diagnosed when at least 3 conditions presented. The selected studies eligible for reviewing were based on the PI(E)CO criteria: P (population), adult and older adults; I/E (intervention/exposure), having oral hypofunction by considering overall and individual 7 oral function conditions; C (comparator), not having oral hypofunction; O (outcome), the general health status, encompassing physical, psychological, and social dimensions. Electronic search limited to English articles was performed through PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases from January 2016 to June 2023. The included studies were assessed for quaility and risk of bias using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Qualitative analyses were performed on the general outcome, and having oral hypofunction considering overall and individual oral function conditions. RESULTS: Ten studies were included in the final syntheses. One was a prospective cohort, one was a case-control, and the others were cross-sectional studies. All included studies were high quality. General health outcomes were mostly frailty, sarcopenia, and malnutrition, whereas mild cognitive impairment,social withdrawal, and gastric cancer prognosis were identified in one of the included studies. The association between general health and having oral hypofunction was stronger than when considering an individual condition. The health outcomes were predominantly associated with mastication and swallowing, whereas their relationships with oral hygiene and dryness were less likely to be reported. CONCLUSIONS: The present review found an association between the presence of oral hypofunction and impaired general health. However, the specific impact on individual physical, psychological, and social dimensions cannot be distinctly delineated. Further prospective studies are required to clarify the causal-effect relationship between oral and general health.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.007
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.379
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations34
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Oral HealthSame topicDysphagia Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207