MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387576829 · doi:10.3389/froh.2023.1260442

The composition of the dental pellicle: an updated literature review

2023· review· en· W4387576829 on OpenAlexaff
Joachim Enax, Bernhard Ganss, Bennett T. Amaechi, Erik Schulze zur Wiesche, Frederic Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oral Health · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryBiochemistryWestern blotBacteriaProteomicsMicrobiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The dental pellicle is a thin layer of up to several hundred nm in thickness, covering the tooth surface. It is known to protect the teeth from acid attacks through its selective permeability and it is involved in the remineralization process of the teeth. It functions also as binding site and source of nutrients for bacteria and conditioning biofilm (foundation) for dental plaque formation. Methods: For this updated literature review, the PubMed database was searched for the dental pellicle and its composition. Results: The dental pellicle has been analyzed in the past years with various state-of-the art analytic techniques such as high-resolution microscopic techniques (e.g., scanning electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy), spectrophotometry, mass spectrometry, affinity chromatography, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA), and blotting-techniques (e.g., western blot). It consists of several different amino acids, proteins, and proteolytic protein fragments. Some studies also investigated other compounds of the pellicle, mainly fatty acids, and carbohydrates. Conclusions: The dental pellicle is composed mainly of different proteins, but also fatty acids, and carbohydrates. Analysis with state-of-the-art analytical techniques have uncovered mainly acidic proline-rich proteins, amylase, cystatin, immunoglobulins, lysozyme, and mucins as main proteins of the dental pellicle. The pellicle has protective properties for the teeth. Further research is necessary to gain more knowledge about the role of the pellicle in the tooth remineralization process.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.363 · 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

Citations23
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Oral HealthSame topicOral microbiology and periodontitis researchFrench-language works237,207