MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391679724 · doi:10.1186/s12903-024-03981-9

Efficacy of an experimental toothpaste containing sodium bicarbonate, sodium hyaluronate and sodium fluoride on gingivitis

2024· article· en· W4391679724 on OpenAlexaff
Alyson Axe, Nisha R. Patel, Jimmy Qaqish, Martin R. Ling, Mako Araga, Chaju Ram Goyal

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Oral Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOral microbiology and periodontitis research
Canadian institutionsAll Sum Research Center (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsToothpasteMedicineSodium bicarbonateGingivitisDentistrySodium fluorideDental plaqueFluorideRandomized controlled trialSodium hyaluronateSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gingivitis is driven by plaque accumulation and, if left untreated, can progress to irreversible periodontitis. For many, the mechanical action of toothbrushing does not achieve adequate plaque control. The aim of this study was to investigate whether twice-daily use of a toothpaste containing 0.2% high molecular weight (HMW) sodium hyaluronate with 67% sodium bicarbonate and 0.221% sodium fluoride (experimental toothpaste) could improve gingival health compared with a regular fluoride toothpaste (negative control). The study also assessed whether the experimental toothpaste could provide additive gingival health benefit over a toothpaste containing only 67% sodium bicarbonate and 0.221% sodium fluoride (positive control). METHODS: This was a single-center, examiner-blinded, randomized, clinical study in healthy adults with mild-to-moderate gingivitis. At baseline, after abstaining from toothbrushing for 12 h, prospective participants underwent oral soft tissue (OST) and oral hard tissue examination followed by assessments for gingival inflammation (Modified Gingival Index [MGI]), gingival bleeding (Bleeding Index [BI]), and supra-gingival plaque (Turesky Plaque Index [TPI]). Eligible participants were stratified by gender and baseline number of bleeding sites (low: <45; high: ≥45 bleeding sites). Following randomization, participants underwent prophylactic dental treatment. Participants received a full OST examination, MGI, BI and TPI assessments after 3 days, 1, 2 and 6 weeks of product use. RESULTS: In total, 110 participants were screened for study entry and all were randomized to receive one of three toothpastes (experimental: sodium hyaluronate, sodium bicarbonate, sodium fluoride; positive control: sodium bicarbonate, sodium fluoride; negative control: regular fluoride toothpaste). For all measures, significant improvements were observed in participants receiving either sodium bicarbonate-containing toothpaste (experimental or positive control) compared with the regular fluoride toothpaste (negative control) at week 6. No significant difference was observed in any assessment or visit comparing the experimental toothpaste with the positive control. CONCLUSIONS: Both the experimental and the positive control toothpastes demonstrated clinically relevant improvements in gingival health compared with a regular fluoride toothpaste (negative control). However, no additional gingival health improvement was observed for the experimental toothpaste compared with the positive control, therefore, no additional gingival health benefit can be attributed to the inclusion of sodium hyaluronate in this formulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04737538 (04/02/2021).

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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