MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386814186 · doi:10.3390/dj11090217

The Role of Bacterial, Dentinal, Salivary, and Neutrophil Degradative Activity in Caries Pathogenesis

2023· review· en· W4386814186 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDentistry Journal · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPathogenesisDentinal TubuleDentistryRoot cariesMedicineChemistryMicrobiologyDentinImmunologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Until recently, it was widely accepted that bacteria participate in caries pathogenesis mainly through carbohydrate fermentation and acid production, which promote the dissolution of tooth components. Neutrophils, on the other hand, were considered white blood cells with no role in caries pathogenesis. Nevertheless, current literature suggests that both bacteria and neutrophils, among other factors, possess direct degradative activity towards both dentinal collagen type-1 and/or methacrylate resin-based restoratives and adhesives, the most common dental restoratives. Neutrophils are abundant leukocytes in the gingival sulcus, where they can readily reach adjacent tooth roots or gingival and cervical restorations and execute their degradative activity. In this review, we present the latest literature evidence for bacterial, dentinal, salivary, and neutrophil degradative action that may induce primary caries, secondary caries, and restoration failure.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.301 · 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