Diagnostic Significance of Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio in Recurrent Aphthous Stomatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Recurrent aphthous stomatitis (RAS) is a prevalent ulcerative condition affecting oral mucosa. OBJECTIVES: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to compare the level of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) between individuals with RAS and those who are healthy. METHODS: A systematic search for relevant publications before June 21, 2022, was conducted using Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus. The results were presented as the standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI), and a random-effects model was used to calculate pooled effects due to the presence of significant heterogeneity. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: = 91.5%). In the subgroup analysis based on the study design, it was found that retrospective studies showed higher levels of NLR in patients with RAS compared to healthy controls (SMD = 0.62, 95% CI= 0.16 to 1.08, P < 0.01), but these results were not applied to prospective studies (SMD = 0.35, 95% CI = -0.03 to 0.74, P < 0.07). CONCLUSION: Elevated neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio revealed crosstalk between systematic inflammation and RAS.
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 | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.028 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".