Association between periodontal disease and osteoporosis in postmenopausal women: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the relationship between periodontitis and postmenopausal osteoporosis. Methods This research was carried out according to the principles laid down by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guideline statement. We searched the Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, and WanFang databases from inception to July 1, 2023 to collect all relevant publications, with no restrictions on publication date or Languages. Cochrane's tool for assessing RoB was used to evaluate the RoB for RCTs. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the RoB for cohort studies and case-control studies. Mean differences (MD) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were used for analysis of continuous data. Heterogeneity was measured using the I 2 statistic. Revman 5.4 software was used for the meta-analysis. Results 28 observational studies with 19611 patients, including 5813 cases in the postmenopausal osteoporosis group and 13798 cases in the non-osteoporosis group. The studies showed that the degrees of clinical attachment loss (CAL), probing depth (PD), gingival recession (GR), simplified oral hygiene index (OHIS), and percentage of sites with bleeding on probing (BOP) in the postmenopausal osteoporosis group were higher than those in the non-osteoporosis group[CAL(MD = 0.89(mm), 95 % CI [0.48,1.30], p < 0.00001), PD (MD = 0.27(mm), 95 % CI [0.13, 0.41], p = 0.0001), GR (MD = 0.28(mm), 95 % CI [0.20, 0.35], p < 0.00001), OHIS (MD = 1.32,95 % CI [1.12,1.51], p < 0.00001), BOP(MD = 12.71(%), 95 % CI [3.24,22.18], p = 0.009)]. Eleven studies found that bone mineral density (BMD) in the postmenopausal osteoporosis group was lower than that in non-osteoporosis group (MD = −0.41(U/cm 2 ), 95 % CI [-0.77,-0.05], p = 0.03). The combined analysis results of the studies in the two groups showed that there were no significant differences in the loss of alveolar crestal height (ACH)[(MD = −1.76(%),95%CI [-3.64,0.12], p = 0.07)]. Conclusion Postmenopausal osteoporosis patients are more likely to suffer from periodontitis, and the condition is easily aggravated.
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 | 0.015 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.036 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".